High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

Raju & Another vs State Of Haryana on 10 December, 2008

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Raju & Another vs State Of Haryana on 10 December, 2008
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH



                   Criminal Miscellaneous No. M-24595 of 2008
                               Date of Decision: December 10, 2008


Raju & Another
                                                       .....PETITIONER(S)

                                VERSUS


State of Haryana
                                                     .....RESPONDENT(S)
                            .      .      .


CORAM:           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA


PRESENT: -       Mr. R.S. Mamli,              Advocate,      for     the
                 petitioners.

                 Mr.    Sidharth   Sarup,                   Assistant
                 Advocate General, Haryana.


                            .      .      .

AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral)

                 This    petition         has       been    filed    under

Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in

case FIR No.218 dated 7.7.2008 lodged for offences

under Section(s) 323, 452, 506, 427, 34 IPC with

Police Station, Sadar, Karnal.

Learned counsel for the petitioners

states that the petitioners have joined the

investigation.

Learned counsel for the respondent-

State, on instructions from Randhir Singh, Assistant

Sub Inspector, states that indeed the petitioners

have joined the investigation and are not required

for further investigation at this stage.

Crl. Misc. No. M- of 2008 [2]

In view of the above, the petition is

allowed.

Order dated 22.9.2008 is hereby made

absolute and it is directed that in the event of

arrest, the petitioners shall be enlarged on bail on

furnishing of bail bonds to the satisfaction of the

Arresting/Investigating Officer, subject to the

following conditions :-

“(i) The petitioners shall make themselves available
for interrogation as and when required;

(ii) The petitioners shall not directly or indirectly
make any inducement, threat or promise to any
person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to
dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the
Court or to any police officer; and

(iii) The petitioners shall not leave India without
the previous permission of the Court.”

This order shall enure till 10 days after the

petitioners receive a notice of filing of final

report u/s 173, Cr.P.C. within which period, they

would be at liberty to apply for regular bail.


                                                              (AJAI LAMBA)
December 10, 2008                                                JUDGE
avin