Anil vs State Of Haryana
2023 Latest Caselaw 5145 P&H

                                                                                   2023:PHHC:057484

                               In The High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana
                                               At Chandigarh



                                                                CRM-M-18868-2023 (O&M)
                                                                Date of Decision:- 24.4.2023


                               Anil                                                ... Petitioner


                                                           Versus


                               State of Haryana                                    ... Respondent



                 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL



                 Present:-            Mr. Gagan Pradeep S. Bal, advocate, for the petitioner.

                                      Mr. Gurmeet Singh, AAG, Haryana,
                                      assisted by Inspector Sukhjeet Singh.

                                      *****

                  FIR No.             DATE         POLICE STATION              OFFENCES
                  0003                01.02.2023   SVB, Hisar                  7    of   Prevention   of

                                                                               Corruption Act, 1988



                 GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J. (Oral)

1. The petitioner seeks grant of regular bail in a case registered in a case

arising out of above mentioned FIR.

2. The FIR was lodged at the instance of Mukesh Kumar wherein he

alleged that for the purpose of raising a loan against his residential

house, he required a report from Patwari as regards ownership of the

house. He approached the Patwari who demanded illegal gratification

MOHAN SINGH 2023.04.24 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CRM-M-18868-2023 (O&M) -2- 2023:PHHC:057484

of Rs.2000/- for doing the needful which was later on settled at

Rs.1800/-. The complainant recorded the said conversation in his

phone. Since, he did not wish to pay the bribe, he reported the matter

to the Vigilance Bureau. A trap was accordingly laid and the

petitioner was caught red-handed while accepting tainted currency

notes of Rs.1800/-.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner

has falsely been implicated in the present case and that there is no

credible evidence to establish the allegations against him.

4. Opposing the petition, learned State counsel submitted that since the

petitioner was caught red handed while accepting the tainted currency

notes whose serial numbers had been noted down, the complicity of

the petitioner is clearly evident. Learned State counsel has however,

informed that the petitioner has been behind bars since the last about

2 ½ months and that challan already stands presented. It has been

informed that sanction for prosecuting the petitioner is still awaited

and that as many as 16 PWs have been cited. It has also been

informed that the petitioner is not involved in any other case.

5. This Court has considered rival submissions.

6. No doubt, there are specific allegations against the petitioner

regarding the petitioner having made a demand and having accepted

bribe from the complainant. However, till date the prosecution has

not even obtained sanction for prosecuting the petitioner. Petitioner

otherwise has been behind bars since the last about 2 ½ months.

Conclusion of trial is likely to consume time inasmuch as 16 PWs

MOHAN SINGH 2023.04.24 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CRM-M-18868-2023 (O&M) -3- 2023:PHHC:057484

have been cited. In these circumstances, further detention of the

petitioner is not justified. The petition, as such, is accepted and the

petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing

bail bonds to the satisfaction of learned trial Court/Chief Judicial

Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned.

7. It is however, direction that the aforesaid order shall be subject to the

condition that the petitioner shall furnish voice sample, as and when

directed, and not threaten the complainant, in any manner. In case, it

is found that the petitioner does not cooperate for furnishing voice

samples or is found to be intimidating the witnesses, it shall be open

to the prosecution to move an application for cancellation of bail.

                 24.4.2023                                        ( GURVINDER SINGH GILL)
                 mohan                                                     JUDGE


                                    Whether speaking /reasoned         Yes / No

                                    Whether Reportable                 Yes / No




MOHAN SINGH
2023.04.24 17:12
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this
order/judgment