Crl.M.No.M-27226 of 2010 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl.M.No.M-27226 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: November 17, 2010 Amit Kumar .....Petitioner v. State of Haryana .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr.Rajesh Lamba, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.P.M.Anand, Addl.A.G., Haryana. ...... RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) The present petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No.111, dated 5.10.2009, registered under Sections 467, 468, 420, 471 IPC, at Police Station Ismailabad, District Kurukshetra. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record carefully. This Court while issuing notice of motion on 16.9.2010, passed the following order: “Crl.M.No.48600 of 2010 Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Crl.M.No.M-27226 of 2010 Heard. Contends that initially FIR under Section 420 IPC was registered against the petitioner-accused. He was arrested in this case for the said offence and released on regular bail. Further contends that investigation has already been completed and final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. has also been filed and however, at the time of filing of final report, offences under Crl.M.No.M-27226 of 2010 (O&M) -2- Sections 467, 468,471 IPC have also been added. Further contends that facts remained the same on which the bail was granted to the petitioner and that on the same facts other offences have been added. Further contends that petitioner has already received summons to appear before the Court and that he is ready to appear before the Court and apply for regular bail for offences under Sections 467, 468 and 471 IPC, which were added lateron. Notice of motion for 8.10.2010. However, in the meantime, petitioner is directed to appear before learned trial Court on the date fixed and if he so appears and applies for regular bail for offences under Sections 467, 468 and 471 IPC, learned trial Court is directed to admit him to interim bail subject to any conditions that may deem to be imposed by it.” Subsequently on 8.10.2010, following order was passed by this Court: “ It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner could not appear before the learned trial Court on the date fixed as Court was on leave on that day. Hence, she requests for some more time to appear before the learned trial Court. It has been stated by learned counsel for the State that the next date fixed before the trial Court is 28.10.2010. Hence, in view of this fact, petitioner is directed to appear before learned trial Court within two weeks and if he so appears and applies for regular bail for offences under Sections 467, 468 and 471 IPC, trial Court is directed to admit him on interim bail subject to any conditions that may deem to be imposed by it. Adjourned to 17.11.2010.” It has been stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that now he has appeared before learned trial Court on 17.10.2010 and has been released on interim bail by learned trial Court pursuant to the aforementioned order of this Court. Crl.M.No.M-27226 of 2010 (O&M) -3- It has been stated by learned State counsel that the petitioner has already appeared before learned trial Court and granted interim bail. 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. In view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, order dated 16.9.2010, granting interim bail to petitioner-Amit Kumar, 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. 17.11.2010 (Ram Chand Gupta) meenu Judge