Punjab-Haryana High Court
Monu Yadav vs State Of Haryana on 16 April, 2024
Author: Mahabir Singh Sindhu
Bench: Mahabir Singh Sindhu
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:051392
CRM M-13355 of 2024 Neutral Citation No. 2024:PHHC:051392
210 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM M-13355-2024 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 16.04.2024
Monu Yadav ......... Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana ........Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU
Present: Mr. Sunil Kumar Dhanda, Advocate,
for the petitioners.
Mr. Kiran Pal Singh, AAG, Haryana.
MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU. J.
Present petition has been filed under Section 438 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure (for short "Cr.P.C") for seeking pre-arrest bail in FIR
No.347 dated 30.12.2023 registered under Sections 147, 323, 384 and 506 read
with Section 149 IPC, at Police Station, Rampura, District Rewari
2. Allegations are that petitioner along with co-accused formed an
unlawful assembly and in prosecution of common object of said assembly
caused injuries to informant Rinku as well as her brother-in-law Akshay and
while leaving the spot, they threatened the informant with dire consequences.
3. Learned counsel submits that petitioner was granted interim bail
vide order dated 15.03.2024 and in pursuance of that, he has joined
investigation, therefore, his custodial interrogation is not required.
4. The above factual position is duly acknowledged by learned State
Counsel, on instructions from quarter concerned and fairly submitted that
custodial interrogation of petitioner is not required, at this stage.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper-book.
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:051392
CRM M-13355 of 2024 Neutral Citation No. 2024:PHHC:051392
6. A Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 15.03.2024,
granted interim bail to petitioner and the same reads as under:-
"The instant petition has been filed under Section 438 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as
Cr.P.C) for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR
No.347 dated 30.12.2023 registered under Sections 147, 149,
323, 384 and 506 IPC at Police Station Rampura, Rewari,
Haryana.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner inter alia
contends that name of the petitioner was not figured in the FIR
and the offence under which the FIR is registered, is triable by
the Magistrate. It is further contended that the maximum
punishment provided for the offence alleged to be committed in
the FIR (supra) is upto 3 years and no notice under Section 41-A
Cr.P.C was served upon the petitioner. As such, in view of the
ratio of law culled out in the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. CBI (2022) 10 SCC
51, petitioner is entitled for bail.
Notice of motion.
On the asking of the Court, Ms. Geeta Sharma, DAG,
Haryana, who is present in Court, accepts notice on behalf of the
respondent-State and opposes the prayer for grant of
anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
In the meantime, keeping in view the law enunciated by
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. CBI
(2022) 10 SCC 51; Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar (2014) 8
SCC 273 and Mohd. Muslim alias Hussain Vs. State (NCT of
Delhi) 2023 SCC OnLine SC 352, at the first instance, petitioner
is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer on or before
21.03.2024 and on his doing so or in the event of arrest,
petitioner shall be admitted to interim bail on furnishing of
bail/surety bond to the satisfaction of the Investigating/Arresting
Officer. The petitioner shall cooperate with the Investigating
Officer and abide by the conditions as provided under Section
438 (2) Cr.P.C.
If the Investigating/Arresting Officer does not permit the
petitioner to join the investigation, the petitioner would appear
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:051392
CRM M-13355 of 2024 Neutral Citation No. 2024:PHHC:051392
before the Illaqa Magistrate, who would then summon the
Arresting Officer and direct him to join the petitioner in
investigation, in terms of the order of this Court.
Adjourned to 16.04.2024.
Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed as
expression of opinion of this Court on merits of the case and the
trial Court shall proceed without being prejudiced by
observations of this Court."
7. In pursuance of aforesaid order, petitioner has joined investigation
and his custodial interrogation is not required. Thus, interim order dated
15.03.2024 is made absolute, subject to the conditions as envisaged under
Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
8. It is also made clear that petitioner shall fully co-operate with the
Investigating Officer as and when called for further investigation.
9. The above observations be not construed as an expression of
opinion on merits of the case; rather confined only to decide the present bail
matter.
10. Disposed off accordingly.
11. Pending criminal misc. application(s), if any, shall also stand
disposed off.
16.04.2024 (MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU)
SN JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether Reportable: Yes/No
3 of 3
