High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/42395/2018allowed

Sandeep v. State Of Haryana

2018-12-10Mr. Justice Arvind Singh Sangwan2 pages

CRM-M No.42395 of 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.42395 of 2018 Decided on: 10.12.2018 Sandeep ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN Present :

Mr. Bhupender Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Naveen Sheoran, DAG, Haryana.

ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN, J. (Oral) The petitioner prays for grant of anticipatory bail in FIR No.343 dated 17.06.2018, registered under Sections 323, 324 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (in short 'IPC') at Police Station Qila Panipat, District Panipat.

The operative part of the order dated 27.09.2018, vide which interim anticipatory bail has been granted to the petitioner, is reproduced as under:- "....Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is running a mobile shop and the complainant had visited his shop for the purpose of repairing his mobile phone and a dispute arose on account of payment of the charges and on that account, a scuffle had taken place in which the petitioner also suffered injuries. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon MLR of the petitioner (Annexure P-3) to submit that the petitioner has suffered four injuries. It is further MOHD YAKUB 2018.12.10 17:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh

CRM-M No.42395 of 2018 submitted that the petitioner has also given a complaint to the police on the same day, however, no action has been taken on his complaint.

Learned State counsel, on instructions from HC Dinesh Kumar, submits that the petitioner is named in the FIR and to verify the allegations in the FIR, the petitioner be directed to join the investigation.

List again on 10.12.2018...."

Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that, in pursuance to the order dated 27.09.2018, the petitioner has appeared before the Investigating Officer and joined the investigation. Counsel for the State, on instructions from HC Shri Niwas, has not disputed the aforesaid fact and submits that the petitioner is no more required for further investigation. It is also submitted that challan has already been presented before the trial Court. In view of the above, this petition is allowed and the interim bail granted to the petitioner vide order dated 27.09.2018 is made absolute subject to the conditions envisaged under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

(ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN) JUDGE 10.12.2018 yakub Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No MOHD YAKUB 2018.12.10 17:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh