CRM-M 16163 of 2009 -1- IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH CRM Nos.29826, 37784 to 37786 of 2009 and CRM-M 16163 of 2009 Date of Decision: 22.10.2009 Mehboob Hasan ..Petitioner. Vs. State of Haryana ..Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present : Mr.Atul Lakhanpal, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Manav, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Narender Sura, AAG Haryana for the respondent/State. Mr.R.S.Sihota, Sr.Advocate with Mr.B.R.Rana, Advocate for the complainant. RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. ( Oral) CRM Nos.29826, 37784 to 37786 of 2009 Allowed as prayed for. Main Case This is an application for bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short `Cr.P.C.') in case registered vide FIR No.102 dated 30.3.2009 under Section 3 of Explosives Substance Act, Police Station Nuh, District Mewat. The aforesaid FIR has been registered at the instance of Ahmed son of Abdul Jalil Ansari, who has stated that on 29.3.2009 due to explosion in the house, roofs and walls of the bath-room had fallen. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that on 20.3.2009, the CRM-M 16163 of 2009 -2- petitioner was already in custody in District Jail, Deegh (Rajasthan), therefore, there was no question of involvement of the petitioner in the alleged occurrence. The petitioner had applied for anticipatory bail in the aforesaid FIR before the Court below, which was dismissed on 5.6.2009 by Additional Sessions Judge, Nuh. Counsel for the petitioner has argued that vide order dated 12.6.2009, notice of motion was issued and arrest of the petitioner was stayed subject to his joining investigation. It is also submitted that as per his information, the petitioner has already joined the investigation. Sh.R.S.Sihota, Sr.Advocate appearing on behalf of the complainant has vehemently argued that the petitioner does not deserve the concession of bail as earlier he had absconded from the police custody though he surrendered later on. Counsel for the State, on instructions received from ASI Puran Lal has submitted that in terms of the order dated 12.6.2009, the petitioner has already joined the investigation on 15.6.2009 and during the investigation, which has been carried upto date, the petitioner is not found connected with the alleged occurrence on the basis of which aforesaid FIR has been registered. He also submits that the petitioner is no more required for custodial interrogation. In view of the above, order dated 12.6.2009 is hereby made absolute. However, the petitioner shall abide by the provisions of Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. (Rakesh Kumar Jain) 22.10.2009 Judge Meenu CRM-M 16163 of 2009 -3-