Sube Singh v. State Of Haryana

CRM-M-48680-2025 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.48680 of 2025 Date of decision: 08.05.2025 Sube Singh ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana .. Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S. GREWAL Present:- Mr. Rakesh Dhiman, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Parveen Kumar Aggarwal, DAG, Haryana.

Mr. Rohit, Advocate for Mr. Ramnish Puri, Advocate for the complainant.
*** H.S. Grewal, J. (Oral) This is a petition for anticipatory bail filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, (BNSS), 2023 in case bearing FIR No.251 dated 30.08.2024 under Sections 420, 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Sushant Lok District Gurgaon.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the Agreement to Sell, Will and General Power of Attorney all dated 24.02.2010 as are alleged in the FIR are false and fabricated documents and never executed by the present petitioner in favour of the complainant-Vikas Atri an advocate. That earlier also complainant gave similar complaint (Annexure P-2) to the police and the matter was inquired into and the concerned inquiry report is Annexure P-3, wherein it was recommended that there is no need for any police action on the complaint. That however, just within one month of completion of said inquiry, police registered FIR (Annexure P-4) on the basis of same allegations which were earlier disbelieved by the Inquiry Officer of the police department. That even otherwise if the allegations recorded in the FIR are taken on their face value Sonia Puri 2025.05.14 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-48680-2025 -2then also primarily it appears to be a case of civil nature. 3.

This Court, vide order dated 27.09.2024, had directed the petitioner to appear before the Investigating Officer and join investigation and in the event of his arrest, he was ordered to be released on ad-interim bail to the satisfaction of the Investigating/Arresting Officer, subject to the conditions envisaged under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

4.

Learned State counsel on instructions from SI-Karambir states that the petitioner has joined the investigation and is not required for custodial interrogation.

5.

In view of the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner especially when the petitioner having joined investigation, the order dated 27.09.2024 granting interim bail to the petitioner is made absolute. 6.

However, the petitioner shall abide by the conditions stipulated under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. He shall also join investigation as and when called upon to do so.

7.

The petition stands allowed.

(H.S. GREWAL) JUDGE 08th May, 2025 Sonia Puri Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether Reportable :

Yes/No Sonia Puri 2025.05.14 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document