Mahinder Kumar And ANR v. State Of Haryana
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-58796-2024 Date of decision: April 01, 2025 MAHINDER KUMAR AND ANOTHER
...Petitioners
Versus STATE OF HARYANA
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL
Present:
Mr. Sahil, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Yuvraj Shandilya, AAG, Haryana. MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL) 1.
The instant petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 seeking grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.667 dated 09.11.2024 under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, registered at Police Station Gharaunda, District Karnal. 2.
Vide order dated 25.11.2024, notice of motion was issued and the relevant part of the order reads as under:- "Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that the petitioners, who are aadhtis, had just stood as sureties and had no role to play in the crime in question."
3.
Vide order dated 08.01.2025, the petitioner had been granted interim bail by this Court, with direction to join investigation and the relevant part of the said order reads as under:- "On being put to notice, learned State counsel, on instructions, has not disputed that the petitioners had only stood as sureties and other than that they had no role to play in the alleged crime; the prime accused in the present case was Mohit Kumar, Proprietor of M/s Bajaj Rice Mills, who had allegedly duped HAFED of an amount of Rs.2,67,00,000/-. However, it has been asserted by the learned State counsel that petitioner no.2 happens to be the father of co-accused Mohit Kumar." Jaspreet Kaur 2025.04.02 10:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
CRM-M-58796-2024 -24.
5.
!
"
6. #
! $%&'()(*$&'+,!! April 01, 2025 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Jaspreet Kaur JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :
Yes/No Whether reportable :
Yes/No Jaspreet Kaur 2025.04.02 10:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh