IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Criminal Misc. - M No. 15841 of 2011 (O&M). Date of decision: December 01, 2011. Ayub Khan ....Petitioner Versus The State of Haryana ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Shri Karan Pathak, Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri S.K.Hooda, Addl: Advocate General, Haryana. RAJESH BINDAL, J Prayer in the present petition is for grant of pre-arrest bail in FIR No.122 dated 28.04.2011, registered under Sections 323/506 IPC and 3/33/89 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short the Act), at Police Station, Hathin District Palwal. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that earlier FIR No. 51 dated 16.02.2011 was registered against the petitioner under Sections 294/323/506 IPC at the said Police Station, for the same incident. The petitioner was arrested and released on regular bail. Subsequent thereto another FIR regarding the same incident bearing No. 122 dated 28.04.2011, was registered pertaining to violation of provisions of the Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that no such allegations were made against the petitioner earlier. Merely on account of a -2- Crl.Misc.-M No.15841 of 2011 complaint made by the complainant to the Commission for SC & ST, ('for short the Commission'), which was sent to the Commissioner of Police, subsequent FIR was registered against the petitioner on these allegations though for the same occurrence earlier FIR was there. Learned counsel for the State did not dispute the fact that for the same incident earlier FIR No.51 was registered. However, subsequent FIR was registered invoking the provisions of the Act after receipt of a complaint through the Commission. He submitted that earlier also there were allegations against the petitioner under the Act, however, on investigation those were found to be false and no challan was presented for those offences. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and considering the submissions made above especially that the petitioner was earlier arrested and released on bail, in my opinion the petitioner is not required to be taken into custody for interrogation. He is directed to appear before the Investigating/Arresting Officer on 10.12.2011 at 10.00 AM and further as and when called upon for further investigation. In case of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on furnishing of bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting/Investing Officer. He shall also be bound by all the conditions as contained in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. The petition stands disposed of. December 01, 2011 (Rajesh Bindal) Malik Judge