Crl. Misc. No.M-6299 of 2011 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Date of Decision: August 11, 2011 1. Crl. Misc. No. M-6299 of 2011 Suresh Kumar Khurana …..Petitioner Vs. State of Haryana …..Respondent 2. Crl. Misc. No. M-6603 of 2011 Parvinder Kumar …..Petitioner Vs. State of Haryana …..Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI. -.- Present:- Mr. Sushil Jain, Advocate for the petitioner in Crl. Misc. No. M-6299 of 2011. None for the petitioner in Crl. Misc. No. M-6603 of 2011 Ms.Shalini Attri, DAG, Haryana. Mr.Harkesh Manuja, Advocate for the complainant. Crl. Misc. No.M-6299 of 2011 [2] -.- M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) This order will dispose of two petitions bearing Crl. Misc. Nos. M-6299 and M-6603 of 2011 for grant of pre-arrest bail in a case registered at the instance of Ram Parkash complainant alleging that the complainant had entered into an agreement with one Bittu @ Jeet regarding House No.48, Model Town, Sonepat, for a sum of ` 1.80 crores and had received ` 1.08 crores against a receipt. ` 90 lacs had to be given on July 30, 2008 but on June 24, 2008 the complainant came to know that house had been mortgaged with Oriental Bank of Commerce, Sonepat. The complainant lodged an FIR against Govind Lal. The complainant was introduced by dealer Bittu to one Suresh Khurana, assuring that with his connection with police Department, he would get the entire matter sort out. He took a sum of ` 6.40 lacs in the name of police. In the mean time, the complainant got matrimonial dispute with his wife Kailash Devi. Suresh Khurana has got the matter compromised and did not play a fair role and got the petitioner involved in a false case registered against the complainant and his second wife Maya and got complainant and Maya Devi arrested. On January 21, 2011, at about 7.00 p.m., the complainant was called to the house of the petitioner, who is a scribe. When the complainant took coffee, he felt unconscious. The petitioner-Parvinder Kumar slapped the complainant whereas petitioner-Suresh Khurana also assaulted him alongwith unknown persons. At about 10.00 p.m. at night, Suresh Khurana allegedly got the Crl. Misc. No.M-6299 of 2011 [3] signatures of the complainant on blank papers and also on the Register and threatened him to take his complaint back from I.G. and showed revolver to him. From the entire FIR, the only allegations against petitioner Suresh Khurana is that he had given slap on the face of the complainant. Counsel for the petitioner-Parvinder Kumar has contended that the petitioner being a friend of Suresh Khurana, petitioner had made a statement against the complainant in case Smt.Kailash Vs. Ram Parkash under Section 494 IPC pending in the Court at Ghaziabad. On account of the said circumstance, the complainant has got a grievance against him, therefore, the petitioner-Parvinder Kumar has been falsely implicated in the case. I have heard counsel for the petitioners as well as counsel for the complainant. Counsel for the complainant has vehemently opposed the petition for pre-arrest bail. Petitioner Parvinder Kumar is admittedly handicapped to the extent of 50% as per the medical certificate. His enmity with the complainant is apparent on the account of petitioner having appeared against the complainant in the matter of bigamy. Taking the allegations on its face value, only simple assault has been attributed to the petitioners. Petitioner-Parvinder Kumar has already joined investigation. It does not appear to be a case of custodial interrogation. So far as petitioner Suresh Khurana is concerned, he is alleged to have given elbow blow to the complainant. A copy of the compromise Crl. Misc. No.M-6299 of 2011 [4] dated May 16, 2010 entered into between the complainant and his wife Kailash Devi has been placed on record indicating that the complainant had given an undertaking that he would not keep any relations with Maya Devi and he will not meet her. So far as petitioner Suresh Khurana is concerned, he has signed the same as a witness. The FIR has been registered against the complainant on the compliant of Kailash Devi. Petitioner Suresh Khurana has been cited as a witness of the prosecution against the complainant. Copy of the statement of petitioner-Suresh Khurana made against the complainant under Section 161 Cr.P.C. has been placed on record as annexure P-3. The petitioner appears to have intervened in the matrimonial dispute of the complainant as a result of which he seems to have been involved in the case. The petitioner has already joined investigation. He can be granted the concession of pre-arrest bail as it does not appear to be a case of custodial interrogation. The petitions are allowed and it is ordered that in case of arrest of the petitioners, they will be released on bail on their furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the arresting officer subject to the conditions that they will join investigation as and when required by the police and that they will not tamper with the evidence or hamper the investigation in any manner. This order will remain operative till the presentation of challan. In case of presentation of challan, the petitioners will be required to furnish fresh bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Court concerned. Crl. Misc. No.M-6299 of 2011 [5] August 11, 2011 (M.M.S.BEDI) sanjay JUDGE