High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/43960/2019allowed

Bhagat Singh v. State Of Haryana

2019-10-23Mr. Justice Arvind Singh Sangwan2 pages

CRM-M-43960 of 2019 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-43960-2019 Date of Decision : October 23, 2019 Bhagat Singh ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN Present :

Mr. K.S. Dhaliwal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Deepak Grewal, DAG, Haryana.

ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN, J. (Oral) This is the first petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.297 dated 19.11.2018 under Sections 306, 420, 467, 34 IPC and 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Sadar Narwana, District Jind.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no specific allegation against the petitioner. The specific allegations are against Dharmender, who is brother-in-law of the petitioner. Counsel for the petitioner further submits that as per the allegations in the FIR, the complainant sold the land and gave Rs. 1 Crore to the co-accused-Dharmender, his father Om Parkash and mother Kitabo Devi and on that account, son of the complainant used to remain mentally disturbed. It is further submitted that the co-accused of the petitoner has taken Rs.1 Crore from the complainant for purchase of the land, which was never returned to the complainant and on that account his son Suresh was mentally disturbed and later on, he committed suicide. Counsel for the petitioner further submits SATISH KUMAR 2019.10.23 17:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-43960 of 2019 -2that the challan has already been presented. Counsel for the petitioner further submits that even as per the disclosure of Dharmender, it has not come on record that the petitioner was directly involved in dealing with complainant or his family members. He further submits that the co-accused, namely, Om Parkash and Kitabo Devi, have already been granted the concession of anticipatory bail vide order dated 2.5.2019 passed in CRM-M-64721-2018.

Learned State counsel, on instructions from the Investigating Officer has not disputed the factual position. He further submits that the petitioner is no more required for any further investigation.

Without commenting anything on the merits of the case, considering the aforementioned submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is directed to be released on regular bail, subject to his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Illaqa Magistrate, concerned. However, it will be open for the prosecution to apply for cancellation of bail of the petitioner, in case he is found involved in any other case or misusing the concession of bail, in any manner.

( ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN ) JUDGE October 23, 2019 satish Whether speaking/reasoned : YES / NO Whether reportable :

YES / NO SATISH KUMAR 2019.10.23 17:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document