Mahender Singh vs State of Haryana

Mehinder Singh Sullar, J.—Petitioner-Mahender Singh son of Kalu Ram, has directed the instant petition for the grant of anticipatory bail in a case registered against him, by means of FIR No. 336 dated 24.08.2012, on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC, by the police of Police Station Dharuhera, District Rewari, invoking the provisions of Section 438 Cr.P.C. Notice of the petition was issued to the State.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, going through the record with their valuable assistance and after considering the entire matter deeply, to my mind, the petitioner is entitled to the concession of anticipatory bail in this context.

During the course of preliminary hearing, the following order was passed by this Court on September 11, 2012:-

Learned counsel, inter alia, contended that the BPL Card was issued to the petitioner after due survey by the concerned department at the relevant time. The argument is that in view of the changed circumstances/guidelines, when the petitioner came to know that he is not entitled to the benefit of BPL Card, then he moved an application dated 04.04.2011(Annexure P-2) for deleting his name from the BPL list much prior to the registration of the present case.

Heard.

Notice of motion be issued to the respondent, returnable for 19.09.2012.

Meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to join the investigation before the next date of hearing. In the event of his arrest, the Arresting Officer would admit him to bail on his furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- to his satisfaction.

At the very outset, learned State Counsel has submitted on the instructions from ASI Ranbir Singh, that the petitioner has already joined the investigation. He is no longer required for further interrogation, at this stage. There is no history of his previous involvement in any other criminal case. As, all the offences alleged against him are triable by the Court of Magistrate, therefore, the conclusion of trial would naturally take a long time, particularly when the police did not submit the challan/final police report till today. In the light of aforesaid reasons and taking into consideration the totality of the facts and circumstances, emanating from the record, as discussed here-in-above, the instant petition for anticipatory bail is accepted. The interim bail already granted to the petitioner by this Court, vide order dated September 11, 2012 is hereby made absolute, subject to the compliance of the conditions, as contemplated u/s 438(2) Cr.P.C.

Needless to mention that, in case, the petitioner does not cooperate or join the investigation, the prosecution/complainant would be at liberty to move a petition for cancellation of his bail, in this relevant connection.