Istak Khan v. State Of Haryana

TRIPTI SAINI 2020.07.16 10:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.15651 of 2020 (O&M) Date of decision : 15.07.2020 Istak Khan ... Petitioner Vs.

State of Haryana

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN

Present:

Mr. Sarfraj Hussain , Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Mahima Yashpal, DAG, Haryana.

Mr. Rajesh Bhateja, Advocate, for the complainant. ALKA SARIN, J. (Oral) Heard through video conferencing.

Prayer in the present petition, under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is for grant of regular bail in FIR No.199 dated 06.09.2019 under Sections 323, 354-B, 506, 376, 511, 34 IPC registered at Police Station Nagina.

At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is a compromise arrived at between the complainant and the petitioner. Learned counsel for the complainant has also put in appearance through video conferencing and has not disputed the fact that a compromise has been effected between the parties.

Learned State counsel is also not in a position to deny the factual position regarding the compromise.

TRIPTI SAINI 2020.07.16 10:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No. 15651 of 2019 (O&M) -2Heard learned counsel for the parties.

In view of the above; without commenting anything on the merits of the case and in view the fact that the trial is likely to take a considerable time to conclude, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail during the pendency of the trial subject to his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of trial Court/Duty Magistrate, Nuh. It would, however, be open to the prosecution to the get bail cancelled in case the petitioner is found to be misusing the concession of bail. Disposed of accordingly.

July 15, 2020 (ALKA SARIN) tripti JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/ No Whether Reportable Yes/ No