Shoeb Javed v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-44352-2024 Date of decision: March 10th, 2025 Shoeb Javed .....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana .....Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present:

Mr. Talim Hussain, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Rajat Gautam, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL) Prayer in this petition is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.0449 dated 05.12.2023 under Sections 120-B and 406 of the IPC (Section 406 of the IPC deleted and Sections 201, 407 and 506 of the IPC added lateron) registered at Police Station Ferozepur Jhirka, District Charkhi Nuh.

2.

While issuing notice of motion on 09.09.2024, following submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner were recorded:- "Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that the petitioner is neither the owner of the truck nor was he working as a driver on the truck which was allegedly transporting betel nuts from Nagpur worth approximately Rs.36 lakhs, and which had allegedly been misappropriated and sold by the coaccused. Learned counsel has submitted that the petitioner came to be nominated as an accused subsequently on the second disclosure statement of one Irfan who stated that the misappropriated and stolen PUNEET SACHDEVA 2025.03.10 14:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CRM-M-44352-2024 -2betel nuts of the complainant had been purchased by the petitioner and then in turn sold to coaccused Faizal Rehman."

3.

Thereafter, vide order dated 25.09.2024, the petitioner had been granted interim anticipatory bail with direction to join investigation.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance of order dated 25.09.2024, the petitioner has joined investigation and cooperated with the investigating agency. 5.

Learned State counsel, on instructions, does not dispute the factum of the petitioner having joined investigation and cooperated with the investigating agency. He, on further instructions, submits that the petitioner is not required for further investigation much less for his custodial interrogation.

6.

In view of the above, the petition is allowed and interim order dated 25.09.2024 is made absolute subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C./482(2) BNSS.

March 10th, 2025 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Puneet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No PUNEET SACHDEVA 2025.03.10 14:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh