Tejpal v. State Of Haryana And Another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-61204-2023 (O&M) Date of decision: April 24th, 2025 Tejpal .....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and another .....Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present:

Mr. Ramesh Hooda and Ms. Savita Dhanda, Advocates for the petitioner.

Mr. Rajat Gautam, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. Aayush Goyal, Advocate for Mr. H.S. Gill, Advocate for respondent No.2.

None for the complainant.

MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL) Petitioner is seeking the concession of anticipatory bail in FIR No.404 dated 17.07.2023 under Sections 420/467/468/471/120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Hisar.

2.

Vide order dated 06.12.2023 passed by a coordinate Bench, the arrest of the petitioner was stayed and he had been directed to join investigation.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has reiterated the submissions made on the last date of hearing. It has been submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case for allegedly getting a sale deed of Government land registered in favour of a co-accused. While drawing the attention of this Court to the FIR PUNEET SACHDEVA 2025.04.25 17:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CRM-M-61204-2023 (O&M) -2annexed as Annexure P-1, learned counsel submits that the petitioner's false implication in the present case finds credence from the fact that the petitioner was neither named in the FIR nor has any role been attributed to him. Learned counsel further submits that, even otherwise, there has been an unexplained delay of more than ten years in lodging the instant FIR. It is also submitted that in compliance with the order dated 13.02.2025, the petitioner has joined the 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 13.02.2025, is made absolute subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C./482(2) BNSS.

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

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No PUNEET SACHDEVA 2025.04.25 17:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh