CRM No.M-32170 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:-8.12.2010 Sarabjit Singh son of Sukhdev Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR Present: Mr.Vishal Rattan Lamba, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Shilesh Gupta, D.A.G., Punjab. M ehinder S ingh S ullar , J . (Oral) Petitioner Sarabjit Singh son of Sukhdev Singh, has instituted the instant petition for the grant of regular bail in a case registered against him alongwith his other co-accused, namely, Gurpreet Singh and Sohan Singh etc., by virtue of FIR No.163 dated 1.8.2009, for the commission of offences punishable under sections 406, 420 and 120-B IPC by the police of Police Station City Malerkotla, District Sangrur, invoking the provisions of section 439 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 considering the entire matter deeply, to my mind, the present petition deserves to be accepted in this context. 4. Concisely, the prosecution claimed that petitioner alongwith his other co-accused was working as Conductor on the bus of Libra Bus Service Private Limited. He was stated to have embezzled the amount and did not deposit the fare charged from the passengers in the account of Transport Company. What is not disputed here is that case of the petitioner is identical to the case of other co- accused Gurpreet Singh and Sohan Singh, who have already been allowed regular bail by this court, vide order dated 15.10.2010 passed in CRM No.28513 of 2010. CRM No.M-32170 of 2010 2 Therefore, I see no reason not to extend the same benefit to the present petitioner under the same set of circumstances. Moreover, the petitioner was arrested on 17.8.2010 and since then he is in judicial custody. No useful purpose would be served to further detain him in jail. All the offences alleged against the petitioner are triable by the court of Magistrate. There is no history of his previous involvement in any other criminal case. 5. Therefore, taking into consideration the totality of the 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, to me, the present petitioner is entitled to regular bail in the obtaining circumstances of the instant case. 6. In the light of the aforesaid reasons, the petition for regular bail is allowed and the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of trial Court. 7. Needless to state that nothing observed, here-in-above, would reflect, in any manner, on merits of the case, as the same has been so recorded for a limited purpose of deciding the instant petition. 8.12.2010 (Mehinder Singh Sullar) AS Judge