Naveen Kumar v. State Of Punjab
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.27209 of 2019 Date of Decision: 02.08.2021 NAVEEN KUMAR ......Petitioner Vs STATE OF PUNJAB .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJ MOHAN SINGH Present: Mr. Yogesh Goel, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Amar Ashok Pathak, Addl.A.G., Punjab. (Through video-conferencing) **** RAJ MOHAN SINGH, J.(Oral) Petitioner seeks grant of anticipatory bail in case bearing FIR No. 45 dated 25.03.20219 registered under Sections 420 IPC and, 465, 467, 468, 471 IPS (added later on) at Police Station Lalru District Mohali. Allegations in the complaint are that the petitioner and various bank officials allured the complainant to construct a polly house in his agricultural land.
The petitioner was to construct the polly house, but he did not complete the construction as per guidelines issued by the competent authority. Huge amount was released to the petitioner by the bank in this regard. Notice of motion was issued on 24.06.2019 and the petitioner was directed to join the investigation with interim directions. Learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that earlier also similar complaint was filed and the same was settled PRINCE SAINI 2021.08.
CRM-M No.27209 of 2019 -2with the petitioner after due inquiry by the police. Today, learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Onkar Singh, submits that the police has filed a cancellation report before the Illaqa Magistrate and the petitioner is no more required for any investigation in this case. State has no objection in case the order dated 24.06.19 is made absolute. Learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that however, cancellation report has been submitted to Illaqa Magistrate, but the same has not been accepted so far.
Be that as it may, since the State has come forward with a cancellation report in favour of the petitioner and the petitioner has joined the investigation to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer and his presence is no more required for any further investigation of the case, therefore, I deem it appropriate to confirm the order dated 24.06.2019. In view of above, the interim order dated 24.06.2019 is made absolute. However, the petitioner shall keep on appearing before the Investigating Officer as and when required to do so and shall abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. Petition stands disposed of.
(RAJ MOHAN SINGH) August 02, 2021 JUDGE anita Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No PRINCE SAINI 2021.08.02 18:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document