Mohit v. State Of Haryana And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-55734-2024 Date of decision: 12.12.2024 MOHIT ....Petitioner V/s STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present:

Mr. Manoj Kumar Pundir, Advocate with Mr.Ankur Kumar Panwar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Rahul Mohan, Sr.DAG, Haryana.

***** MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL) 1.

The petitioner is seeking the concession of bail under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in case FIR No.484 dated 19.06.2024 under Sections 148, 149, 323, 308, 506 of the IPC (Section 325 and 201 of the IPC were added later on) registered at Police Station City Karnal.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after the registration of the FIR in question, with the intervention of the well wishers, the parties have arrived at an amicable settlement and also approached this Court by way of CRM-M-42839-2024 for quashing of the FIR on the basis of compromise.

In support, learned counsel has drawn the attention of this Court to Annexure P-4 wherein it stands reflected that the parties have been directed to get their statements recorded before the competent Court with respect to the compromise so effected between them. Learned counsel has POONAM RATHORE 2024.12.12 18:45 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh

CRM-M-55734-2024 -2submitted that in the aforementioned facts and circumstances since the petitioner has now been in custody since 25.06.2024, his further incarceration would serve no useful purpose and he be extended the concession of bail.

3.

Per contra, learned State counsel has not disputed the submissions made by the counsel opposite.

4.

Mr.Vikram Jeet Singh, Advocate has entered appearance on behalf of respondents No.2 and 3 and filed his power of attorney. He does not dispute the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner nor does he opposes the prayer made for enlarging the petitioner on bail. 5.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant material placed on record.

6.

In the facts and circumstances as enumerated hereinabove, this Court deems it fit to extend the concession of bail to the petitioner. 7.

Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed and the petitioner be admitted to bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. However, it is made clear that anything observed hereinabove shall not be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

(MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) JUDGE December 12, 2024 poonam Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No POONAM RATHORE 2024.12.12 18:45 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh