IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M- 9584 of 2010(O&M) Date of Decision: 10.05.2010. Leela Ram and another ...... PETITIONERS Versus State of Punjab and another. ...... RESPONDENTS CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr. C.B.Kaushik, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala, AAG, Punjab. Mr. K.K.Aggarwal, Sr.Advocate with Mr. R.K.Agnihotri, Advocate for respondent No.2. ***** RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) The present petition has been filed for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure in FIR No.58 dated 27.08.2009, under Sections 498-A/306 IPC, Police Station Jatusana, District Rewari. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record. This Court while issuing notice of motion on 31.03.2010 passed the following order:- “Crl.M.No.17148 of 2010 Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Crl.M.No.M-9584 of 2010 CRM No.M-9584 of 2010 Argues that petitioners were found innocent by the police after investigation and however they have been summoned to face trial alongwith their son, i.e., husband of deceased –Sunil, on an application moved under Section 319 Cr.P.C. by the complainant –Mohinder Singh. It has further been contended that petitioners are ready to appear before the Court and face trial. Notice of motion for 10.5.2010. However, petitioners are directed to appear before learned trial Court on the date fixed and if petitioners so appear and apply for bail, they be admitted to interim bail by learned trial Court to its satisfaction subject to any conditions that may be imposed by it.” It has been stated by learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioners have already appeared before learned trial Court pursuant to said order and admitted to interim bail by learned trial Court. It is further contended that charge against the petitioners has already been framed and the case is now fixed for evidence of prosecution. It is further contended that petitioners will continue to appear before learned trial Court on each and every date of hearing. Learned counsel for the State has not disputed these facts. There are no allegations on behalf of the State that petitioners are likely to abscond or that they are likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts in the Court, if released on bail. Hence, in view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the anticipatory bail application filed by Leela Ram and Smt. Omwati is accepted and order dated 31.03.2010 granting interim bail to the petitioners is, hereby, made absolute subject to any conditions that may be imposed by learned trial Court. 2 CRM No.M-9584 of 2010 The present petition stands disposed of accordingly. ( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) May 10, 2010. JUDGE 'om' 3