Gurmeet Singh @ Ghelu v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-44450-2015 Date of Decision : 04.08.2016 Gurmeet Singh alias Ghelu ...... Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ...... Respondent CORAM:- Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jitendra Chauhan

Present:

Mr. Parminder Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Neeraj Poswal, AAG, Haryana assisted by Inspector Gaj Raj Singh.

Mr. Rahul Rathore, Advocate, for the complainant.

***** Jitendra Chauhan , J.(Oral) By filing the present petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner has sought anticipatory bail in a case FIR No.879, dated 30.09.2015, registered under Sections 389, 384 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), at Police Station City Karnal, District Karnal.

On 30.12.2015, the Court had passed the following order :- "Contends that initially the matter was registered under Section 389 IPC and the petitioner was enlarged on bail. Now Sections 384 and 120-B IPC have been added. Apart from this, it is contended that all these facts which have attracted Sections 384 and 120-B IPC were already a part of the FIR.

Notice of motion for 4.2.2016.

Satyawan 2016.08.06 11:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh

CRM-M-44450-2015 -2In the meantime, the arrest of the petitioner shall remain stayed subject to the following conditions :- i) He will make himself available for investigation as and when required to do so.

ii) He will not leave the country without the prior permission of the Court.

iii) He will not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police official."

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contends that in pursuance of the order dated 30.12.2015, the petitioner has joined the investigation.

The learned State counsel, on instructions, submits that in pursuance of the order dated 30.12.2015 passed by this Court, the petitioner has joined the investigation and he is not required for custodial interrogation.

In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the interim bail granted by this Court vide order dated 30.12.2015, is made absolute, subject to the conditions contained in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

The petition stands allowed.

(Jitendra Chauhan) 04.08.2016 Judge sp 1.

Whether reasoned/speaking Yes/No 2.

Whether reportable Yes/No Satyawan 2016.08.06 11:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh