Sumit Yadav v. State Of Haryana

CRM-M-25004-2024 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-25004-2024 Decided on : 09.12.2024 Sumit Yadav ...... Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ...... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL Present : Mr. Vikas Sonak, Advocate for Mr. Sunil Saharan, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Trishanjli Sharma, DAG, Haryana.

**** Manjari Nehru Kaul, J.

The present petition has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C., for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.120 dated 20.04.2024 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 427, 452, 506, 325 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, registered at Police Station Sadar, Hansi, District Hisar.

2.

On 13.08.2024, while noticing the following submissions made by the learned counsel for the State, this Court had granted the concession of interim bail to the petitioner and asked him to join investigation:

" Learned State counsel has not disputed that the petitioner is not involved in any other criminal case, however, it has been submitted by the learned State counsel that the petitioner was clearly visible in the CCTV footage inflicting danda blows on the injured-complainant, which resulted in fracture of one of his knees." SONIA BURA 2024.12.10 10:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-25004-2024 -23.

Learned counsel for the State, on instructions, submits that in compliance of order dated 13.08.2024, petitioner has joined the investigation and cooperated with the investigating officer. Learned State counsel has further submitted that the petitioner is not required for custodial interrogation.

4.

In view of the above, present petition is allowed and interim order dated 13.08.2024 is made absolute subject to the conditions as envisaged in Section 438(2) Cr.PC/482(2) of BNS. (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) 09.12.2024 JUDGE sonia Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No SONIA BURA 2024.12.10 10:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document