Neeraj Rana v. State Of Haryana

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ......

Criminal Misc. No.M-45220 of 2018 .....

Date of decision:14.11.2018 Neeraj Rana .....Petitioner v.

State of Haryana .....Respondent ....

Present:

Mr. Mohit Kakkar, Advocate for Mr. Bhupinder Ghai, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Sukhdeep Parmar, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana for the respondent-State.

Mr. D.D. Sharma, Advocate for the complainant. .....

Inderjit Singh, J.

This petition has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.54 dated 18.9.2018 registered for the offences under Sections 323, 506, 452, 427 and 34 IPC at Police Station Palla, District Faridabad.

Notice of motion has been issued in this case. Mr. Sukhdeep Parmar, learned Deputy Advocate General, Haryana has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent-State and Mr. D.D. Sharma, learned Advocate has appeared for the complainant and contested this petition.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and learned State counsel appearing for the respondent-State and have gone through the record.

From the record, I find that simple injuries have been attributed HARPAL SINGH PARMAR 2018.11.15 16:29 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Cr. Misc. No.M-45220 of 2018 [2] to the petitioner by entering the house of the complainant. The present petitioner has already joined the investigation. She is not required for any custodial interrogation. Nothing is to be recovered from her.

The learned counsel for the complainant has brought to my notice that there are 7 other FIRs registered against the petitioner which have been mentioned in the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. I have gone through those FIRs, out of which five are mainly for the offences under Section 188 IPC along with other sections. The other FIRs are also for the offences under Sections 420, 323 IPC etc. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the present case, I find that no useful purpose will be served by sending the petitioner to custody.

In view of the above, without discussing the facts in minute detail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find merit in this petition and the same is allowed. The interim order dated 11.10.2018 passed by this Court granting interim bail to the petitioner is made absolute. However, the petitioner shall join the investigation as and when called upon to do so and shall abide by the conditions of Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C.

November 14, 2018.

(Inderjit Singh) Judge *hsp* NOTE:

Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes Whether reportable:

No HARPAL SINGH PARMAR 2018.11.15 16:29 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh