KRISHAN MITTAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant petition has been filed under Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for cancellation of pre-arrest bail granted to respondent No. 2 by the trial Court vide order dated 20.08.2020 (Annexure P-11) in case FIR No.304, dated 29.07.2020 registered under Sections 406, 409, 420 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station City Kaithal, District Kaithal, Haryana.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the learned trial Court gravely erred in granting concession of anticipatory bail to respondent No. 2-Poonam Maglani without appreciating that she alongwith other partners of the firm namely M/s Lekh Raj and Sons owed an amount of approximately Rs. 40.00 Crores to the commission agents including the petitioners and as and when they were asked to return their amount they were threatened with dire consequences by the accused including respondent No.2. He further contends that learned trial Court straightaway granted the anticipatory bail to respondent No. 2 without directing her to join investigation. Hence, a prayer has been made that the bail granted to respondent No. 2 be cancelled in view of the serious allegations levelled against her.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon a decision rendered by the Supreme Court in the case of Jai Parkash Singh Vs. State of Bihar: 2012 (2) RCR (Criminal) 251 in support of his submissions.