Amar Singh v. State Of Haryana And Another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-20518-2023 Date of Decision: 17.07.2023 Amar Singh ......... PeƟƟoner

Versus

State of Haryana and another ......... Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present:- Mr. Sudhanshu Sharma, Advocate for the peƟƟoner. Mr. Manish Bansal, Sr. D.A.G, Haryana.

Mr. Bobby Girdhar, Advocate for respondent No. 2. **** ANOOP CHITKARA, J. (ORAL) FIR No.

Dated Police StaƟon SecƟons 11.05.2022 Mahesh Nagar, District Ambala 406, 420, 507 IPC The peƟƟoner has come up before this Court under SecƟon 439 (2) Cr.P.C for cancellaƟon of anƟcipatory bail of respondent No. 2 in the above capƟoned FIR. 2.

Counsel for the peƟƟoner submits that none of the condiƟons of the order of this Court complied so far and prayed for cancellaƟon of bail. 3.

State counsel submits that the peƟƟoner has not joined the invesƟgaƟon even at once and has not even come to furnish his bail bond before the invesƟgator so far. 4.

Vide order dated 12.07.2023, legal aid counsel was appointed on behalf of respondent No. 2 as noƟce issued to him received back unserved with the report that he leŌ the address 10 years back and address furnished in the bail peƟƟon by the accusedrespondent No. 2 was not the address where he is residing currently. Legal Aid Counsel on behalf of accused-respondent No.2 submits that he has gone through the file and although, the peƟƟoner has not complied with the condiƟon and but he be exempted to deposit an amount of Rs. 19 lakh.

5.

Heard the counsel for the parƟes and I have gone through the record. JYOTI 2023.07.18 13:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

CRM-M-20518-2023 -2- 2023:PHHC:089108 6.

AŌer protecƟon from this Court, respondent No. 2 fails to join invesƟgaƟon or to comply with any of the condiƟon. Even noƟce issued to him also received back unserved. Due to grant of bail to peƟƟoner, this Court cannot ask the State to remain standsƟll or depend upon the mercy of accused to proceed further with the trial. This Court is of the view that respondent No. 2 does not deserve any concession. 7.

Given above, the present peƟƟon is allowed and order dated 09.01.2023 is recalled and bail granted to respondent No. 2 sands cancelled. Liberty reserved to the peƟƟoner to file a fresh bail applicaƟon under SecƟon 438 Cr.P.C itself if the peƟƟoner is able to jusƟfy the reasons for which he could not join the invesƟgaƟon and also annexing the corroboraƟng and supporƟng evidence. Legal Aid Counsel is enƟtled to fee as per rules. All pending miscellaneous applicaƟons, if any, stand disposed of. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 17.07.2023 JyoƟ-II Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No JYOTI 2023.07.18 13:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.