Vishal Chatrath v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-22134-2024 Date of decision: September 27th, 2024 Vishal Chatrath .....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab .....Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present:

Mr. Fateh Singh Dhillon, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Shiva Khurmi, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab. MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL) Petitioner is seeking the concession of anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in case FIR No.46 dated 04.03.2024 under Sections 406, 420 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, registered at Police Station Sadar, District Jalandhar. 2.

Ms. Preeti Grover, Advocate, has entered appearance on behalf of the complainant and filed her power of attorney, which is taken record.

3.

Vide order dated 19.07.2024, the petitioner had been granted interim anticipatory bail with direction to join investigation and the relevant part of the said order reads as under:- "Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the dispute, if any, between the parties, is essentially of a civil nature, however, the case in hand has been filed with mala fides just to unnecessarily harass the petitioner, who is the brother of the contractor, who had been given the work to renovate the PUNEET SACHDEVA 2024.09.27 14:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CRM-M-22134-2024 -2house of the complainant. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner had been, from the very beginning, willing to settle all the disputes with the complainant and in the said regard, an amount of about `3.5 lakh had already been returned to the complainant. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner is still willing to sit across the table with the complainant and resolve all disputes."

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance of order dated 19.07.2024, the petitioner has joined investigation and cooperated with the investigating agency. 5.

Learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Jasvir Chand, 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 19.07.2024, is made absolute subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C./482(2) BNSS.

September 27th, 2024 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Puneet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes Whether reportable :

No PUNEET SACHDEVA 2024.09.27 14:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh