Sudesh Kumar Sharma v. State Of Haryana And Others




    
 Date of Decision : August 21, 2024 SUDESH KUMAR SHARMA -PETITIONER V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS -RESPONDENTS

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI

Present:

Mr. B.S. Rana, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rahul Dahiya, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Rajesh Gaur, Addl. A.G., Haryana.

Mr. Dharam Bir Bhargav, Advocate with Mr. Kulwinder Bhargav, Advocate for the respondents No.2 to 5.

*** KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (ORAL) 1.

Through the instant petition, as instituted under Section 439(2) read with Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., a prayer is made for cancellation of anticipatory bail, as granted to the respondents No.2 and 3, and, to the respondents No.4 and 5, respectively vide orders dated 16.05.2023 and 26.05.2023, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ambala, in case FIR No.486 dated 17.10.2022, under Sections 120-B, 454, 457, 380, 447, 379 and 506 of the IPC, registered at P.S. Naraingarh, Ambala. 2.

The learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that a forged and fabricated compromise was produced by the respondents No.2 to 5 before the learned Additional Sessions Judge concerned while beseeching the relief of anticipatory bail. He further submits that, without effecting any

recovery, the concession of anticipatory bail has been granted to the respondents No.2 to 5.

3.

This Court has heard the submissions made by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner, however, does not find any merit therein. The reasons for forming this inference generate from the factum that: (i) it has surfaced during investigation that, there is no specific mention of the date, on which the alleged theft took place; (ii) it has nowhere been mentioned in the complaint as to whether the allegedly stolen articles were exclusively owned by the complainant; (iii) at the time of granting anticipatory bail to the respondents No.2 to 5, a private criminal complaint regarding the same offence was also pending.

4.

Moreover, what further erupts from the record is that, at the time of joining investigation, the respondents No.2 and 3 made certain disclosures. The disclosure made by them is extracted hereinafter from the respondent-State's reply dated 29.11.2023:-


        



   

   !   "# 

    

  #$ %  

&     '

     &   

 

    (   

! )    

  *   &    

&     !  +  

,"&    &  )$  % $       

      

    &  !     

+        +  



  & &&   

 +

&, ,    

         (        #-  

  #   &  (       + + +  

, , &.  )( 

# + .  )  & && &



, , &$ $   

 !   / 0!1  + ( + & &   #    $  $   &    

 + ( +      ++  & #  , ,         $ $       &2, (3 5.

The learned State counsel has also informed this Court that, after completion of investigation, the Final Report under Section 173 of the Cr.P.C. was presented on 29.06.2023, whereupon, the respondents No.2 to 5 caused appearance before the learned trial Court/Magistrate concerned, and thereupon, they have been granted the relief of regular bail. Now the case is pending for consideration on charge.

6.

The learned State counsel has also informed that a civil suit regarding share in joint property is also pending inter se the parties herein, before the learned civil court concerned.

7.

As an upshot of the discussion made hereinabove, this Court does not find any merit in the instant petition and the same is dismissed accordingly.

(KULDEEP TIWARI) August 21, 2024 JUDGE devinder Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether Reportable :

Yes/No