MUKHTIAR SINGH, ADVOCATE Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Vide order dated June 14, 1985, of the learned Sessions Judge, Sonepat, an application for anticipatory bail moved by Mukhtiar Singh, Advocate was rejected and that of Ishwar Singh was allowed. Mukhtiar Singh, Advocate moved an application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the same was allowed by S.S. Sodhi, J., on July 2, 1985 with the direction that he shall join the investigation as and when required by the police and vide order dated June 25,1985, S.S. Sodhi, J. suo motu issued notice to Ishwar Singh accused as to way the bail granted to him be not cancelled. Mr. A.S. Nehra, Advocate appearing for Ishwar Singh accused has contended that there is no allegation made on behalf of the State that Ishwar Singh has tried to misuse the privilege of bail by tampering with the prosecution evidence or by winning over the prosecution witnesses and that, therefore, bail granted to his client should not be cancelled. It is no doubt true that whenever an accused released on bail misuses the privilege of bail, his bail should be cancelled. There is no allegation made by Mr. K.C. Bajaj, Advocate appearing for the State that Ishwar Singh has misused the privilege of bail by tampering with the prosecution evidence. In the circumstances, bail granted to Ishwar Singh cannot be cancelled. In this view I am supported by a Supreme Court decision in the State through Delhi Administration v. Sanjay Gandhi, AIR 1978 S.C. 961. The rule is, therefore, discharged.

(2.) ASSISTANT Sub -Inspector Khushi Ram of Police Station Ganaur wants to interrogate Ishwar Singh accused. Ishwar Singh accused, through his counsel is, therefore, directed to appear before the said police officer at Police Station Ganaur on 15.7.1985 at 10.00 a.m. Order accordingly.