Deepak Khurana v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-39528-2020 Date of Decision:-31.01.2023 DEEPAK KHURANA ... Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF HARYANA ... Respondent -.-

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KARAMJIT SINGH -.- Present:- Mr. Deepak Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Naveen Kumar Sheoran, DAG, Haryana.

Mr. Ashish Sanghi, Advocate for the complainant.

-.- KARAMJIT SINGH , J. (Oral) Prayer is for grant of anticipatory bail in case having FIR No.333 dated 26.7.2020 registered under Sections 420, 506, 120-B IPC and as per remand paper dated 30.10.2020 also under Sections 467, 468, 471 IPC at Police Station Sector 32-33 District Karnal. As per the report of Mediator now the dispute has been settled between the parties and compromise/settlement deed is executed between the parties on 13.12.2022.

The counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance of compromise deed the petitioner is regularly making payment of `50,000/-, per month to the complainant and even in the future the petitioner will abide GAURAV SOROT 2023.02.06 12:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order, judgment and documents.

( 2 ) CRM-M-39528-2020 by the said compromise deed. The counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has already joined investigation with the police. The counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant has now disputed the fact that now the parties have entered into compromise vide aforesaid settlement deed. The counsel for the complainant made prayer that at this point of time the complainant is having no objection if the order of interim bail is made absolute but with liberty to the complainant to approach this Court seeking cancellation of bail of the petitioner, in case, in future the petitioner fails to comply with the terms & condition of the aforesaid deed.

The State counsel on instructions from ASI Parveen Kumar apprised the Court that the petitioner has joined investigation with the police and the police is going to file challan against the petitioner very shortly. The State counsel has also not disputed the fact that now the parties have effected settlement.

In view of the above, without commenting on the merits of the case, present petition is allowed and the order of interim bail is hereby made absolute and the petitioner should abide by the conditions envisaged under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and further in terms and condition of settlement deed dated 13.12.2022, failing which the prosecution/complainant will be at liberty to seek cancellation of the bail of the petitioner. ( KARAMJIT SINGH) 31.01.2023 JUDGE Gaurav Sorot Whether reasoned / speaking?

Yes / No Whether reportable?

Yes / No GAURAV SOROT 2023.02.06 12:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order, judgment and documents.