Munna v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-21933-2024 Date of decision: September 6th, 2024 Munna .....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana .....Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present:

Ms. Monu, Advocate for Mr. Nafees Ahmad Khan, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Yuvraj Shandilya, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana. MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL) Prayer in this petition is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.69 dated 18.02.2024 under Sections 34 of the IPC, Section 11 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 and Section 13(2) of the Haryana Gauvansh Sanrakshan and Gausamvardhan Act, 2015 registered at Police Station Ballabhgarh Sadar, District Faridabad.

2.

While issuing notice of motion on 02.05.2024, following submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner were recorded:- "Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that a false and fabricated case having been planted upon the petitioner is evident from the fact that he was not nabbed at the spot when the vehicle carrying the cattle was intercepted; following a secret information allegedly received by some private persons."

3.

Thereafter, vide order dated 16.05.2024, the petitioner had been granted interim anticipatory bail with direction to join investigation and following submissions of learned State counsel were recorded:- " On a pointed query, learned State counsel, on instructions from SI Pritam Singh, has not disputed the PUNEET SACHDEVA 2024.09.06 13:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CRM-M-21933-2024 -2submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner that he was not apprehended at the spot, however, while drawing the attention of this Court to the status report placed on record today, she submits that on being intercepted by a group of persons, who were members of Narayani Sena, the petitioner along with others fled away leaving their vehicle at the spot. Learned State counsel submits that thereafter, a disclosure statement was suffered by the accused who were nabbed at the spot, who then named the petitioner."

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance of order dated 16.05.2024, the petitioner has joined investigation and cooperated with the investigating agency. 5.

Learned State counsel, on instructions, does not dispute the factum of the petitioner having joined investigation and cooperated with the investigating agency. He, on further instructions, submits that the petitioner is not required for further investigation much less for his custodial interrogation.

6.

In view of the above, the petition is allowed and interim order dated 16.05.2024 is made absolute subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C./482(2) BNSS.

September 6th, 2024 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Puneet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes Whether reportable :

No PUNEET SACHDEVA 2024.09.06 13:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh