CRM No.M-33201 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:-25.11.2010 Nirmal Singh son of Beant Singh ...Petitioner Versus The State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR Present: Mr.Parvesh Sachdeva, Advocate for Mr.Ashok Kumar Khunger, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Shilesh Gupta, D.A.G., Punjab. M ehinder S ingh S ullar , J . (Oral) Petitioner Nirmal Singh son of Beant Singh, has directed the instant petition for anticipatory bail in a case registered against him, by virtue of FIR No.17 dated 6.4.2010, on accusation of having committed the offence punishable under section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003, by the police of Police Station Anti Power Theft, Bathinda, invoking the provisions of section 438 Cr.PC. 2. Notice of the petition was issued to the State. 3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, going through the record with their valuable help and after deep consideration over the entire matter, to my mind, the present petition deserves to be accepted in this behalf. 4. At the very outset, the petitioner was directed to join the investigation. The learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Balraj Singh, has submitted that the petitioner has already joined the investigation and he is no longer required for further interrogation at this stage. 5. What is not disputed here is that the petitioner has already deposited an amount of Rs.40,000/- with the Punjab State Electricity Board, in pursuance of its compounding policy and nothing is to be recovered from him. Moreover, there is no history of his previous involvement in any such case. CRM No.M-33201 of 2010 2 6. So, taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner has already deposited an amount of Rs.40,000/- in pursuance of compounding policy of PSEB and totality of other facts and circumstances, emanating from the record, as discussed here-in-above and without commenting further anything on merits, lest it may prejudice the case of either side during the course of the trial of the case, to me, the present petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in the obtaining circumstances of the instant case. 7. Consequently, it is directed that in the event of his arrest, the petitioner shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail and surety bonds in the sum of Rs.10,000/- to the satisfaction of Arresting Officer, subject to the conditions that (i) he shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Agency as and when required; (ii) he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer and (iii) he will not leave India without prior permission of the trial Court. 8. Needless to state that in case, the petitioner does not cooperate or join the investigation, the prosecution would be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of his bail, in this relevant direction. 25.11.2010 (Mehinder Singh Sullar) AS Judge