RAJEEV KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant petition has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No.235 dated 29.09.2020, registered under Sections 406, 408, 420, 506, 120-B of Indian Penal Code at Police Station Saha, District Ambala.

(2.) Counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner herein has been falsely implicated in the present case, as the allegations as set out in the FIR are not sustainable. It is submitted that the petitioner, who is owner of Raju Dairy, is supplying milk to Mansa Dairy and not to the complainant, as such, the petitioner has no concern with the complainant. It is also argued that the weighing machine/Dharam Kanta is of the company of the complainant and the employees on the Dharam Kanta are also of the company and the milk was being measured by the company employees themselves. It is also contended that no recovery is to be effected from the petitioner and he is ready to join the investigation.

(3.) Notice of motion. Ms. Deepshikha Chauhan, AAG Haryana, who is appearing through the medium of video conferencing, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. Similarly, Mr. Gautam Dutt, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the complainant.