Surjit and Another 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. 214 dated 16.05.2013, under Sections 306/34 IPC, registered at police station Sadar Fatehabad, District Fatehabad. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record including the impugned order passed by learned Sessions Judge, Fatehabad dismissing anticipatory bail application filed by the petitioners.

This Court while issuing notice of motion on 29.10.2013 passed the following order:-

Contends that petitioners were found innocent by the police and, however, they were summoned to face trial by learned trial Court by allowing the application of the prosecution filed u/s 319 Cr.P.C. It is further submitted that marriage of the deceased was performed about ten years before this occurrence and that even as per version of the complainant, deceased alongwith her husband used to live separate from the present petitioners. It is further contended that there were general allegations that petitioners alongwith husband of the deceased used to harass her and that however he made improvements in his statement before the Court that petitioners and husband of the deceased used to doubt her character. Further submitted that petitioners are ready to appear before learned trial Court and face trial.

Notice of motion to Advocate General, Haryana, for 25.11.2013.

In the meantime, petitioners are directed to appear before learned trial Court within two weeks from today and in case they so surrender and apply for bail, learned trial Court is directed to admit them to interim bail subject to any conditions that may deem to be imposed by it.

It has been contended by learned counsel for petitioners that they have already appeared before learned trial court on 01.11.2013 pursuant to said order and admitted to interim bail. He has also produced copy of the order passed by trial court, which is taken on record. It is further stated that petitioners undertake to appear before learned trial court on each and every date of hearing and face trial.

The factual position has not been disputed by learned counsel for respondent-State.

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

Hence, in view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of Surjit and Jai Kauri @ Jai Gauri is accepted and order dated 29.10.2013 granting interim bail in favour of the petitioners is, hereby, made absolute subject to any conditions that may deem to be imposed by learned trial Court. The present petition stands disposed of accordingly.