Sokat v. State Of Haryana

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : 19.04.2023 Sokat ......... Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ......... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present :

Mr. Mohd.Aslam, Advocate for Mr.Afzal Hussain, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Dimple Jain, AAG, Haryana.

**** JAGMOHAN BANSAL , J. (Oral) On 23.12.2022, the following order was passed :- "Instant petition has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. praying for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.525, dated 07.12.2022, under Sections 323, 354, 506 IPC (later on Section 354A has been deleted and Section 354 IPC added), registered at Police Station Punhana, District Nuh (Mewat). It has been contended by counsel for the petitioner that occurrence in question took place on 24.11.2022 whereas FIR was lodged on 07.12.2022, i.e. after an unexplained delay of about 13 days. He submits that there is a party faction in the village on account of recently held Panchayat elections. He has submitted that petitioner has been falsely implicated in a deliberated manner by the prosecutrix. He has submitted that even otherwise the injury attributed

-2is simple in nature. He relies upon Arnesh Kumar vs State of Bihar and another, 2014(3) SCC (Crl.) 449 and submits that in view of the aforementioned facts, no case for custodial interrogation is made out, however, he is ready to join the investigation and abide by all the terms and conditions of the anticipatory bail if this Court considers his request for granting the same. Issue notice of motion for 19.04.2023.

On the asking of the Court, Mr.B.S.Virk, DAG, Haryana, who is present in Court, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State.

In the meanwhile, in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on interim bail subject to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer. The petitioner shall join investigation before the Investigating Agency/Officer. He shall abide by the following conditions as envisaged under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.:- "(i) That the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required to do so;

(ii) That the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) That the petitioner shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court."

State is directed to file status report on or before the next date of hearing."

Learned State counsel on instructions from HC Anita submits

-3that the petitioner has joined investigation and no custodial interrogation is required.

In view of the above, the petition is allowed and the interim bail granted to the petitioner vide order dated 23.12.2022 is made absolute subject to the conditions envisaged under Section 438(2) of Cr.P.C.

If the petitioner or his family members/associates make any attempt to threat/intimidate the witnesses in the present case, the State would be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of bail granted by this order.

Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed as expression of opinion of this Court on merits of the case and Trial Court shall proceed without being prejudiced by observations of this Court.

19.04.2023 ( JAGMOHAN BANSAL ) anju JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No