Anil Goyal v. State Of Haryana

Manoj Kumar 2018.01.18 16:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM No.M- 6564 of 2016 #1#

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND

HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM No.M- 6564 of 2016 Date of Order: 15.01.2018 Anil Goyal ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMOL RATTAN SINGH

Present:

Mr. Anurag Arora, Advocate for Mr. Gautam Dutt, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Virk, DAG, Haryana.

AMOL RATTAN SINGH, J (ORAL) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner having been admitted to interim bail vide an order dated 24.2.2016 of this Court, thereafter the State has also filed a complaint before the competent Court, which is now seized of the same.

Learned State counsel, on query, submits that along with the complaint, even a report under Section 173 Cr.P.C has been filed, in terms of the directions given by the Division Bench of this Court in the petition referred to it on the question whether under the Pre-conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994, an FIR is registrable or not. That being so, as regards granting bail to the petitioner on the basis of the FIR registered, this petition has been rendered

CRM No.M- 6564 of 2016 #2# infructuous and is disposed of as such.

As regards whether the petitioner is to be granted bail or not after the complaint has been filed by the State, that would be considered by the competent Court on an application being made by the petitioner before that Court. However, in the meanwhile, the petitioner already being on bail would continue to remain so on the same bail and surety bonds already furnished till such application is made to that Court, which shall be done within one week.

January 15, 2018 (AMOL RATTAN SINGH ) manoj JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No