Punjab-Haryana High Court
Neeraj Kumar vs State Of Haryana on 5 March, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:031524
2024:PHHC:031524
209 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-6641-2024
Date of decision: 05.03.2024
NEERAJ KUMAR
...PETITIONER
V/S
STATE OF HARYANA
...RESPONDENT
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR
Present: Mr. Sandeep Kotla, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Ms. Geeta Sharma, DAG, Haryana.
****
HARPREET SINGH BRAR J. (ORAL)
Through instant petition, the petitioner is seeking anticipatory bail
in case FIR No.238 dated 30.05.2023 registered under Sections 420, 406 IPC at
Police Station Sector 13-17, Panipat, Haryana.
2. Mr. Sandeep Kotla,, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of
the petitioner and filed his vakalatnama which is taken on record. Registry is
directed to tag the same at the appropriate place.
3. On 08.02.2024, following order was passed:
"The present 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.238 dated
30.05.2023 registered under Sections 420, 406 IPC at Police Station
Sector 13-17, Panipat, Haryana.
Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends
that the agreement to sell was executed between the complainant, wife
of the petitioner and one Vinit Kumar. A perusal of the agreement to
sell indicates that the petitioner's wife is willing to sell her share in
the petrol pump but the complainant is not discharging his liability by
paying the entire sale consideration, as agreed in the agreement. The
dispute between the parties is purely civil in nature, which has been
converted into a criminal case. Further, maximum sentence provided
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:031524
CRM-M-6641-2024 2 2024:PHHC:031524
for the offences alleged to be committed in the FIR registered against
the petitioner is less than 7 years. It is further contended that no
notice under Section 41A Cr.P.C. has been issued to the petitioner
and as such, in view of the ratio of law culled out in the judgment of
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. CBI (2022)
10 SCC 51, the 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. At this stage, Mr. Paramjeet Phor, Advocate,
appears on behalf of the complainant and files his vakaltnama, which
is taken on record.
Registry is directed to tag the same at the appropriate
place.
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, the petitioner is directed to
appear before the Investigating Officer on or before 15.02.2024 and
on his doing so or in the event of arrest, the 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
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 05.03.2024.
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."
4. Learned State counsel, on instructions from SI Teswir, submits
that in compliance of order dated 08.02.2024 passed by this Court, the
petitioner has joined the investigation and is not required for further custodial
interrogation.
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:031524
CRM-M-6641-2024 3 2024:PHHC:031524
5. Keeping in view the statement made by learned State Counsel the
order dated 08.02.2024, is made absolute. The petitioner shall abide by the
terms and conditions enumerated in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
6. The petition is accordingly allowed.
7. Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed as expression of
opinion of this Court on merits of the case and trial Court shall proceed without
being prejudiced by observations of this Court.
(HARPREET SINGH BRAR)
March 05, 2024 JUDGE
manisha
(i) Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
(ii) Whether reportable Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:031524
3 of 3
