CRM-M-17377 of 2011 (O&M) - 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** CRM-M-17377 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision:28.07.2011 Makhan Singh . . .Petitioner Versus State of Punjab . . . Respondent ***** CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN ***** Present: Mr.R.S. Dhaliwal, Advocate, for the petitioner. ***** RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J (ORAL) This is a petition for pre-arrest bail in a case registered vide FIR No.38 dated 17.3.2011 under Sections 420, 447, 457, 380, 506 & 120-B of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’) at Police Station Chhajli, District Sangrur. Petitioner had earlier applied for anticipatory bail by way of CRM-M- 10329 of 2011 in which the following order was passed on 21.4.2011: “At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that Nirmal Singh (petitioner No.3) has been arrested and granted regular bail vide order dated 13.4.2011 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Sunam. Therefore, the petition quo him has been rendered infructuous. The criminal miscellaneous petition qua Nirmal Singh (petitioner No.3) is dismissed as having been rendered infructuous. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that he does not press the application for bail of Avtar Singh (petitioner No.1) and Makhan Singh (petitioner No.4). However, it is submitted that Ranjeet Kaur (petitioner No.2) and Sukhpal Kaur (petitioner CRM-M-17377 of 2011 (O&M) - 2 - No.5) are ladies; besides, Gurcharan Singh (petitioner No.6) is the father’s sister’s husband (Phuphar of Ranjeet Kaur (petitioner No.3)) and is too distant in relationship, may be admitted to bail in the event of their arrest and they would join the investigation. Accordingly, the criminal miscellaneous application qua Avtar Singh (petitioner No.1) and Makhan Singh (petitioner No.4) is dismissed as withdrawn. Notice of motion qua Ranjeet Kaur (petitioner No.2) Sukhpal Kaur (petitioner No.5) and Gurcharan Singh (petitioner No.6) to advocate General, Punjab for 13.5.2011. In the meantime, in the vent of arrest of petitioners No.2, 5 and 6, they shall be admitted to interim bail on their furnishing personal bonds and surety each to the satisfaction of the investigating /arresting officer. The said petitioners shall join the investigation as and when called and shall abide by the conditions of Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.” Learned counsel for the petitioner is repeatedly asked by this Court that what is the change in circumstance because of which he has filed the petition again on the same cause of action but he has not given any answer except for saying that earlier petition was filed by another counsel. Since, there is no change of circumstance, therefore, the present petition is hereby dismissed. (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) JULY 28, 2011 JUDGE Vivek