Kulwinder Singh vs State of Haryana

Naresh Kumar Sanghi, J.—Prayer in this petition is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, Kulwinder Singh, who has been booked for having committed the offences punishable under Sections 148, 302, 452 and 506 read with Section 149, IPC, in a case arising out of FIR No. 12, dated 15.02.2013, registered at Police Station, Nathusari Chopta, District Sirsa. Learned counsel contends that FIR was registered on 15.02.2013 and for the last seven months, the investigation qua the petitioner is going on but the Investigating Agency has not been able to collect any legal evidence connecting the petitioner with the alleged offences except the disclosure statements of the co-accused; that the investigation qua the co-accused of the petitioner is complete and even the charge-sheet (report u/s 173, Cr. P.C.) has been filed and nothing has emerged on record against the petitioner and that the petitioner has joined the investigation several times in view of the interim directions issued by this Court on different dates.

Learned counsel for the State very fairly concedes that except the disclosure statement of the co-accused of the petitioner, no other material has emerged on record connecting the petitioner with the alleged offences. However, he has opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner on the ground that the call details of the mobile phones used by the petitioner and his co-accused are still awaited, therefore, the bail be not granted to the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the complainant opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner on the ground that the co-accused of the petitioner had specifically disclosed to the police with regard to involvement of the petitioner, therefore, he be not granted bail.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the material available on record.

Learned counsel for the State has very fairly conceded that except the disclosure statements of the co-accused of the petitioner, there is no material connecting the petitioner with the alleged offences. It has also been contended that the petitioner has joined the investigation thrice and no material has emerged on record to connect him with the alleged offences.

Keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, the present petition is allowed and the interim directions passed by this Court on different dates are made absolute.

The petitioner shall continue to join the investigation as and when required to do so and abide by all the conditions laid down u/s 438(2), Cr. P.C. However, it is made clear that if the petitioner violates the conditions of Section 438(2), Cr. P.C., in that eventuality, the prosecution/complainant would be free to move an application for withdrawal of the concession of bail granted to him by this Court.