RAM CHAND GUPTA,J.(ORAL) - (1.) THE present petition has been filed for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure in FIR No.32 dated 15.02.2011 under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)g, 120-B read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 3 of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, registered at Police Station Charkhi Dadri, District Bhiwani. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record including the impugned order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhiwani dismissing anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of the petitioner.
(2.) THIS Court while issuing notice of motion on 31.05.2012 passed the following order:- "CRM No.32922 of 2012 Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Contends that petitioner was not challaned by the police and however, he was summoned by learned trial Court vide order dated 16.03.2012 by allowing application filed by prosecution under Section 319 Cr.P.C. merely on the ground that he is registered owner of the vehicle which was involved in this crime. It is further contended that he himself made statement before the court that though he is owner of the vehicle and however, on the day of occurrence vehicle was being driven by his driver -Ajit Singh and that on that day he was away to Jaipur. It is further contended that he is ready to appear before learned trial Court and face trial. Notice of motion to Advocate General, Haryana for 31.07.2012. In the meantime, petitioner is directed to appear before learned trial Court within two weeks from today and if he so appears and applies for bail, learned trial Court is directed to admit him to interim bail subject to any conditions that may deem to be imposed." It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has already appeared before learned trial Court and released on interim bail pursuant to said order dated 31.05.2012. He has also filed a copy of the said order, which is taken on record. These facts have not been disputed by learned counsel for the State. Hence, in view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of petitioner Suresh Kumar is accepted and order dated 31.05.2012 granting interim bail in favour of the petitioner is, hereby, made absolute subject to compliance of any conditions that may deem to be imposed by learned trial Court. The present petition stands disposed of accordingly.;