Harmail Singh v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-50173-2024 Date of decision: February 24th, 2025 Harmail Singh .....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana .....Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present:

Mr. Shivam Grover, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Rajat Gautam, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL) The petitioner is seeking the concession of anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in FIR No.94 dated 18.03.2024 under Sections 420, 120-B, 467, 468, 471 of the IPC registered at Police Station Shivaji Nagar, District Gurugram. 2.

Vide order dated 21.11.2024, the petitioner had been granted interim anticipatory bail with direction to join investigation and the relevant part of the said order reads as under:- "Learned senior counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the FIR in question. He further submits that the petitioner is ready to join investigation and cooperate with the investigating agency.

Learned State counsel, on instructions, has submitted that although the petitioner is not a signatory to any of the documents pertaining to the alleged land transactions and no amount of money was deposited into his account by the complainant, however, the PUNEET SACHDEVA 2025.02.24 16:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CRM-M-50173-2024 -2petitioner is the father of the main accused Pooja, and was always present alongside her when the complainant was lured entering into an agreement to sell with respect to the property in question, which was not even in the name of the co-accused."

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance of order dated 21.11.2024, the petitioner has joined investigation and cooperated with the investigating agency. 4.

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.

5.

In view of the above, the petition is allowed and interim order dated 21.11.2024, is made absolute subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C./482(2) BNSS.

February 24th, 2025 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Puneet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No PUNEET SACHDEVA 2025.02.24 16:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh