Kajal vs State Of Haryana

Arvind Singh Sangwan, J

The petitioner prays for grant of anticipatory bail in FIR No.136 dated 04.10.2020, registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC at Police

Station Sector 20, Panchkula.

The operative part of the order dated 03.11.2020, vide which interim anticipatory bail has been granted to the petitioner, is reproduced as under:-

“....Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that it is alleged by the complainant, who is the ex-husband of the petitioner, that she had

allegedly forged death certificate of the complainant and applied for widow pension. Learned counsel, however, contends that after the

divorce, the petitioner had applied for pension as a destitute divorcee and has not received any widow pension. The petitioner is a 25 years

old lady with a seven year old girl child and has no other source of income besides pension as destitute divorcee.

Issue notice to the respondent.

At the asking of the Court, Ms. Aditi Girdhar, AAG, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State.

Mr. Fateh Saini, Advocate, has put in appearance on behalf of the complainant. He contends that in view of the seriousness of the allegations, the

petitioner is not entitled to the concession of anticipatory bail.

List on 08.12.2020....â€​

Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that, in pursuance to the order dated 03.11.2020, the petitioner has appeared before the Investigating Officer

and has joined the investigation.

Counsel for the State, on instructions from the Investigating Officer, has not disputed the aforesaid fact and submits that the petitioner is no more

required for further investigation.

In view of the above, this petition is allowed and the interim bail granted to the petitioner vide order dated 03.11.2020 is made absolute subject to the

conditions envisaged under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.