High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/40379/2019disposed of

Anil Kumar v. State Of Haryana

2020-01-07Mr. Justice Raj Mohan Singh3 pages

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.40379 of 2019 (O&M) Date of Decision:- 07.01.2020 ASI Anil Kumar

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJ MOHAN SINGH Present:- Mr. Naveen S. Bhardwaj, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Surender Singh, AAG, Haryana.

***** RAJ MOHAN SINGH, J .(Oral) The petitioner seeks grant of anticipatory bail in case bearing FIR No.6 dated 13.08.2019, registered under Sections 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 at Police Station S.V.B. Rohtak.

At the time of issuance of notice of motion on 20.09.2019, following order was passed:- " Present petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for seeking pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, namely Anil Kumar in case FIR No. 06 dated 13.08.2019, registered under Section(s) 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 at Police Station State Vigilance Bureau, Rohtak,

-2District Rohtak.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that as per police proceedings (Annexure P3) itself, there was no payment of alleged bribe money to the petitioner on 13.08.2019 and still he has been arrayed as accused. More so, petitioner is ready to join the investigation.

Notice of motion.

On asking of the Court, Mr. Ashish Sanghi, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana accepts notice on behalf of the respondent. A copy of paper-book be provided to him during the course of the day.

List on 25.11.2019.

Meanwhile, petitioner(s) is directed to join the investigation. In the event of arrest, petitioner(s) shall be released on interim bail to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer. The petitioner(s) will join the investigation as and when called for and shall also abide by the conditions as specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C."

In compliance to the aforesaid order, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner has joined the investigation and undertakes to join further investigation as and when called upon to do so by the Investigating Agency. Learned State counsel on instructions from Inspector Manjeet admits the same and states that his custodial interrogation is no more required in further investigation of the case.

-3In view of the statement made by learned State counsel, order dated 20.09.2019 is made absolute, however petitioner shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C.

Petition stands disposed of.

07.01.2020 ( Raj Mohan Singh ) geeta Judge Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No