Arun Kumar @Mohit vs State of Haryana

Ram Chand Gupta, J.—The present petition has been filed for anticipatory bail u/s 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure in FIR no. 61 dated 16.05.2013, under Sections 323 /324 /427 /452 /506 /34 IPC, registered at police station Shahzadpur, District Ambala. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record including the impugned order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ambala dismissing anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of the petitioner.

This Court while issuing notice of motion on 10.07.2013 passed the following order:-

Contends that father of petitioner is Sarpanch of Village Majra Shahzadpur and that in order to safeguard the panchayat land he had instituted a petition u/s 13 of the Punjab Village Common Land Act against the complainant who had encroached upon the land belonging to the Gram Panchayat and just to pressurize father of the petitioner, the present complaint has been lodged. It is also contended that on 16.5.2013 complainant along with his son has also misbehaved with mother of the petitioner and complaint regarding the said occurrence was already made to the police. Further submitted that even as per the case of the prosecution it is a case of simple injury and on the similar facts, Satish Kumar, i.e., father of present petitioner, has already been granted bail by this Court.

Notice of motion to Advocate General, Haryana, for 12.8.2013.

However, in the meantime, petitioner is directed to join the investigation and in case he is arrested, he shall be released on interim bail by the Arresting Officer to his satisfaction subject to compliance of conditions specified u/s 438(2) Cr. P.C.

It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has already joined the investigation pursuant to said order dated 10.07.2013.

It has also been stated by learned counsel for the State, on instruction from ASI Ram Karan, that petitioner has joined the investigation. However, bail application has been opposed on the plea that injury has been attributed to present petitioner.

There are no allegations on behalf of the State that petitioner is likely to abscond or that he is likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts in the Court, if released on bail.

Taking into consideration the aforementioned facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of Arun Kumar @Mohit is accepted and order dated 10.07.2013 granting interim bail in favour of the petitioner is, hereby, made absolute subject to compliance of conditions specified u/s 438(2) Cr. P.C. The present petition stands disposed of accordingly.