Sunil Kataria v. State Of Haryana And Another
!"!
# $ %%& '(#!) *+!
%%%%% !!
# + , +"("
'
+-# # # .
+
%%%%% "/ # #"
$
01 % '
' 2
! "# $
' 2
% %
& '& (# $$) *+ $*$$ '&,-.# %/)$$/ *0 $*%1 /*$/*0 /1$/10%$* 2-3$)%45$04/5 & #&6
&
$
7 ' 3 ' ',-.&&# $ # $ & ' ' 3 $) *+ $*$$3.
%108+ $*$$ ,-.
& # $
$1) /*0/9)*8-3 $)4% 2545 ,-.# 1*$8 */ $*$9 &&
&&' # $# $
& '&' 3 "& &&
&&& '# $ ' 3.
Learned counsel for the respondent No.2, however, has submitted that the FIR was totally motivated in order to roped in respondent No.2 so as to get his bail cancelled. To buttress his arguments, he has submitted that after registration of FIR No.90 dated 26.03.2024, compromise was effected between the parties and the same was quashed by this Court vide order dated 07.08.2024 passed in CRM-M-17818-2024. He thus, submits that the contention raised by counsel for the petitioner is totally misconceived for cancellation of bail. He submits that the law pertaining to the cancellation of bail is entirely different from that of granting bail. He submits that respondent No.2 is duly appearing before the trial Court and no ground is made out for cancellation of bail. 4.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the submissions made by counsel for respondent No.2 and has submitted that respondent No.2 was granted bail subject to certain conditions. He submits that though FIR No.90 dated 02.03.2024 was registered against respondent No.2, however, the same was quashed on the basis of compromise. He submits that there is no other complaint against respondent No.2 regarding misusing his concession of bail.
)
3
-&2: &
4 ;' 3 '
! " #$ %
&
'
"""""
"""""
'
&
!
"
#$ %&$' (
) !%
*#$ + '
62 ;' 3 "
,
-!
!
"
#. $
() *
+
,
+ !#
-!# -!
# + -!#
. " +
-# $&'' 3 $) *+ $*$$ & ,-.# 1*$8 */ $*$9 && '3 < order dated 07.08.2024 passed in CRM-M-17818-2024 on the basis of compromise.
& # $ ' && ' &&&&'' & 3 & & & '&# $ & '
%%&
' 2
.
="&( >(# =' >(#