IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Criminal Miscellaneous No. M-24067 of 2010 Date of Decision: August 23, 2010 Sundeep Diwan .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Haryana & Another .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. Ashish Aggarwal, Advocate, for the petitioner. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) 1. This petition has been filed praying for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to respondent No.2, Rohit Kaushik. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner- complainant essentially argues that certain non existing facts have been taken into account while granting bail. Order passed by the Court indicates version of FIR. Learned counsel further contends that they are not contents of the FIR, rather they are extracts from an affidavit sworn by one of the accused. Crl. Misc. No. M-24067 of 2010 [2] 3. I have considered the contentions of learned counsel. 4. In the FIR itself, portion of affidavit (dated 19.11.2009) of Rohit Kaushik has been referred to. I find no factual error in the order that forms basis of granting bail to respondent No.2. 5. The petition is dismissed. (AJAI LAMBA) August 23, 2010 JUDGE avin 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?