Pankaj Kumar v. State Of Haryana

2024:PHHC:044820

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-45901-2023 Date of decision : 03.04.2024 PANKAJ KUMAR ....Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF HARYANA

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN Present :

Mr. Ravindra Jain, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Gaurav Bansal, DAG, Haryana.

PANKAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL) On 14.09.2023, the following order was passed :- "Apprehending his arrest in FIR No.0380 dated 27.04.2023 registered for offence punishable under Sections 406 & 420 IPC at Police Station Sadar, Karnal, the petitioner has preferred this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking pre-arrest bail.

Inter-alia submits that from the bare perusal of the contents of FIR (Annexure P-1) it is evident that the complainant invested the money in anticipation of high return and no amount has transferred to the account of petitioner.

Notice of motion.

On asking of the Court, Mr. Gaurav Bansal, D.A.G., Haryana appears and accepts notice on behalf of the respondent/State.

Adjourned to 19.12.2023.

In the meantime, in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on interim bail subject to his furnishing personal and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer. As and when called, the petitioner shall join the investigation. He shall abide by the conditions enumerated under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C." Deepak Kumar 2024.04.03 18:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-45901-2023 -22024:PHHC:044820 2.

Today, Ld. State Counsel on instructions submits that the petitioner has already joined investigation and is no more required for custodial interrogation.

3.

Without commenting on the merits of the case and in view of the aforesaid fact, order dated 14.09.2023 is made absolute, subject to the conditions as enumerated under Sections 438(2) Cr.P.C. 4.

This order should not be treated as "blanket" order. It will not be read granting the petitioner indefinite protection from arrest. It shall be confined to the FIR mentioned ibid and will not operate in respect of any other incident that involves commission of an offence. 5.

This order does not in any manner limit or restrict the rights or duties of the police or investigating agency to investigate into the charges against the petitioner.

6.

The petitioner shall be deemed to be in custody for the purpose of Section 27 of the Evidence Act in regard to a discovery of facts made in pursuance of information supplied by the petitioner in case the occasion arises.

7.

It will be open to the police or the investigating agency to move this Court for a direction under Section 439(2) Cr.P.C. to arrest the accused, in the event of violation of any term, such as absconding, noncooperating during investigation, evasion, intimidation or inducement to witnesses with a view to influence outcome of the investigation or trial. 8.

Petition stands disposed off accordingly.

April 03, 2024 (Pankaj Jain) Dpr Judge Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No Deepak Kumar 2024.04.03 18:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document