Om Pal Singh Ahlawat vs. State Of Haryana
Held
The Court held that in view of the statement made by the learned State counsel, confirming that the petitioner had joined the investigation and was no longer required for further investigation, the interim order dated 16.10.2024 granting anticipatory bail should be made absolute. The petitioner was directed to continue to join the investigation as and when called by the Investigating Officer and to abide by the conditions provided under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. (likely referring to the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, though the judgment uses the older IPC reference in the FIR details). The reasoning was based on the petitioner's compliance and the State's no objection to the grant of anticipatory bail. The ratio is that compliance with investigation requirements and the State's lack of objection can lead to the confirmation of anticipatory bail.
Facts
The petitioner, Om Pal Singh Ahlawat, sought anticipatory bail in FIR No. 355 dated 28.10.2020, registered at Police Station Civil Lines Sirsa, District Sirsa. The FIR was filed under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) including Sections 406, 409, 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 420, and 120-B, and also under Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017. The petitioner's counsel stated that the petitioner had joined the investigation in compliance with a previous order dated 16.10.2024 passed by the High Court. The State counsel confirmed that the petitioner had joined the investigation and was no longer required for further inquiry.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) in light of his compliance with the investigation requirements and the State's submission that he is no longer required for further investigation? The petitioner argued that he had joined the investigation as per the court's previous order and that the State had confirmed his cooperation, implying no further custodial interrogation was necessary. The State argued that since the petitioner had joined the investigation and was not required further, the interim order granting anticipatory bail should be made absolute.
Sections Cited
Section 132, Section 482
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
211
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-51044-2024 Date of Decision: 11.12.2024 CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.S.SHEKHAWAT Present : Mr. Aditya Sanghi, Advocate and Mr. Himanshu Garg, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Sheenu Sura, DAG, Haryana. N.S.SHEKHAWAT, J. (Oral)
The instant petition is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.355 dated 28.10.2020 registered under Sections 406, 409, 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 420 and 120-B of IPC and Section 132 of CGST Act, 2017, at Police Station Civil Lines Sirsa, District Sirsa.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance of the order dated 16.10.2024 passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court, the petitioner has joined the investigation.
Learned counsel for the State has submitted that the petitioner has joined the investigation and is no longer required for further investigation.
In view of the statement made by learned State counsel, the interim order dated 16.10.2024 is made absolute. The petitioner shall continue to join investigation, as and when called by the Inves
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.