Sidharth @ Shardanand v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-38968-2019 Date of Decision:-14.10.2019 SIDHARTH @ SHARDANAND ... Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF HARYANA & ANOTHER ... Respondents *****

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL ***** Present:- Mr. Robin Singh Hooda, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Ashok Singh Choudhary, Addl. A.G., Haryana. ***** GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J. (Oral) 1.

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking grant of regular bail in a case registered against him vide FIR No.144 dated 24.04.2019 under Sections 354, 354-A, 506 & 509 IPC, registered at Police Station Murthal, District Sonepat.

2.

Mr. Shakti Singh, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of the complainant and has filed memorandum of appearance, which is taken on record.

3.

The FIR was registered at the instance of Pooja wherein she has levelled allegations to the effect that she was molested by the petitioner and that an attempt to commit rape was also made.

GAURAV SOROT 2019.10.15 09:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

( 2 ) CRM-M-38968-2019 4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the present case, the complainant is a major and that the FIR came to be lodged under some mistaken belief and misunderstanding which has now been resolved and that the parties have in fact approached this Court seeking quashing of the FIR on ground of compromise by way of filing CRM-M-35443-2019, wherein notice of motion has been issued and co-accused of the petitioner namely Naveen has already been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 4.9.2019.

5.

Learned State counsel has, however, feigned ignorance about the compromise. It has further been submitted that since specific and categoric allegations have been levelled against the petitioner, no case for grant of bail is made out.

6.

In view of the fact that parties are stated to have compromised the matter and that in any case the investigation has also been concluded, further detention of the petitioner will not serve any useful purpose. The petition, as such, is accepted and the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned. ( GURVINDER SINGH GILL) 14.10.2019 JUDGE Gaurav Sorot Whether reasoned / speaking?

Yes / No Whether reportable?

Yes / No GAURAV SOROT 2019.10.15 09:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document