KRISHAN KUMAR GARG Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard the counsel for the parties at length.

(2.) Admittedly, the parties are at issue in various civil proceedings. Prima facie, there are findings to the effect that the petitioner has in fact improved the functioning of Dharamshala. This fact is, however, vehemently denied by Mr. Ghai. He has stated that the same was the situation in the year 1995. The present order of the Court depicts totally different picture. Arrest of the petitioner had been stayed by this Court on 1.9.2000 subject to his joining investigation as and when required. Mr. Chopra has stated that all the books of accounts which were in the custody of the petitioner had been handed over to the Investigating Officer.

(3.) In view of the above, anticipatory bail petition is allowed. In the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer. If there is any record remaining with the petitioner, he is directed to cooperate with the investigation. Bail petition allowed.