Punjab-Haryana High Court
Dhanna Ram vs State Of Haryana And Another on 20 March, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:039880
2024:PHHC:039880
208 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-9406-2024
Date of decision: 20.03.2024
Dhanna Ram ....Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and another ...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR
Present: Mr. Narender Kaajla, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Ms. Geeta Sharma, DAG, Haryana.
HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (ORAL)
This petition has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking
anticipatory bail in case bearing FIR No.771 dated 29.12.2023 under Sections
406/420 of IPC registered at Police Station City Dabwali, Sirsa.
On 22.02.2024, the following order was passed:-
'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.771 dated
29.12.2023 registered under Sections 406, 420 IPC at Police Station
City Dabwali, District Sirsa.
Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that as
per the allegations contained in the FIR, the amount in question was
paid to the co-accused. It is further contended that the petitioner has
clean antecedents. The maximum punishment provided for the offence
alleged to be committed in the FIR (supra) is upto 7 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, the petitioner is entitled for bail.
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:039880
2024:PHHC:039880
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, the petitioner is directed to
appear before the Investigating Officer on or before 29.02.2024 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 20.03.2024.
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.'
Learned State counsel on instructions from ASI Ajit Singh, at the
very outset informs the Court that the petitioner has joined the investigation and
his custodial interrogation is not required.
Mr. Lupil Gupta, Advocate puts in appearance on behalf of the
complainant/respondent No.2 and files his vakalatnama in the Court today
which is taken on record.
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:039880
2024:PHHC:039880
In view of the statement of learned State counsel, order dated
22.02.2024 is hereby made absolute. The petitioner shall abide by the terms and
conditions envisaged under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
The petition stands disposed of.
(HARPREET SINGH BRAR)
JUDGE
20.03.2024
Neha
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
3 of 3
