Saurabh Prabhakar v. State Of Haryana

-1232 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Decided on : 26.11.2024 Saurabh Prabhakar ...... Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ...... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL Present : Mr. Pardhuman Garg, Advocate with Mr. Kanav Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Rahul Mohan, Sr. DAG, Haryana.

Mr. Hemant Hans, Advocate for the complainant.

**** Manjari Nehru Kaul, J.(Oral) 1.

This is the second petition filed by the petitioner seeking concession of regular bail in case FIR No.29 dated 10.08.2023 under Sections 420 and 109 IPC registered at Police Station Cyber Crime Police Station Rohtak District Rohtak.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that in a Magisterial trial, the petitioner has been in custody since 04.05.2024 and after charges were framed on 12.08.2024, none of 12 prosecution witnesses had been examined so far. A prayer, therefore, has been made in the aforementioned facts and circumstances to enlarge the petitioner on bail, more so, when the

-2parties have arrived at an amicable settlement between them. Learned counsel has further submitted that in view of the compromise effected, the parties have approached this Court for quashing of FIR on the basis of compromise.

3.

Learned State counsel, on instructions, has not disputed the custody period of the petitioner as well as the stage of trial. 4.

Learned counsel for the complainant has also not disputed the submissions made by the counsel opposite qua the parties having arrived at an amicable settlement and having approached this Court for quashing of FIR in question on the basis of compromise. It has also been submitted that pursuant to the directions given by this Court in CRM-M-51258-2024, the parties have already got their statements recorded before the learned trial Court concerned with respect to the compromise so effected. Learned counsel for the complainant has further submitted that in the aforementioned facts and circumstances, he does not oppose the prayer made by the counsel for the petitioner for extending the concession of bail to the petitioner.

5.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material placed on record.

6.

The petitioner has been in custody since 04.05.2024. The investigation in the case in hand is complete as challan stands

-3presented and even charges framed, more so, the matter has been compromised between the parties.

7.

In the facts and circumstances as enumerated hereinabove, this Court deems it fit to extend the concession of regular bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner be admitted to bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.

8.

However, it is made clear that anything observed hereinabove shall not be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

26.11.2024 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) sonia JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No