Hira Lal v. State Of Haryana

CRM-M No.45313 of 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.45313 of 2018 Decided on: 29.01.2019 Hira Lal ....Petitioner

Versus

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

Mr. R.S. Mamli, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Harpreet Kaur, AAG, Haryana.

ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN , J.

(Oral) The petitioner prays for grant of anticipatory bail in FIR No.461 dated 26.09.2018, registered under Sections 406, 420 and 506 IPC at Police Station Pehowa, District Kurukshetra. The operative part of the order dated 12.10.2018, vide which interim anticipatory bail has been granted to the petitioner, is reproduced as under:- "....Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per allegations in the FIR, the complainant has paid an amount of Rs.8.00 lacs to co-accused Sanjeev Kumar, in presence of the petitioner, for sending her husband to Austria but later on, husband of the complainant was sent to a country other than Austria. Thereafter, again on the representation given by the petitioner and his wife that they will send him abroad, the passport and photographs of Joginder Singh were handed over and another amount of Rs.4.00 lacs was given to the petitioner and his wife. In MOHD YAKUB 2019.01.29 16:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M No.45313 of 2018 December, 2017, the complainant came to know that her husband has not reached Austria and thereafter, a panchayat was convened on 08.03.2018, wherein coaccused Sanjeev Kumar has given an affidavit that he will send Joginder Singh to Austria before 01.04.2018 or he will call him back and he had also handed over two cheques to the complainant party. It is further submitted that as per the FIR, no money was transferred in the account of the petitioner.

Notice of motion for 29.01.2019...."

Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that, in pursuance to the order dated 12.10.2018, the petitioner has appeared before the Investigating Officer and has joined the investigation. Counsel for the State, on instructions from SI Ilam Singh, has not disputed the aforesaid fact and submits that the petitioner is no more required for further investigation.

In view of the above, this petition is allowed and the interim bail granted to the petitioner vide order dated 12.10.2018 is made absolute subject to the conditions envisaged under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

(ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN) JUDGE 29.01.2019 yakub Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No MOHD YAKUB 2019.01.29 16:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document