In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ...... Criminal Misc. No.M-10944 of 2010 ..... Date of decision:19.7.2010 Gurcharan Singh .....Petitioner v. State of Punjab .....Respondent .... Present: Mr. H.R. Nohria, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. V.P.S. Sidhu, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State. ..... S.S. Saron, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner seeks regular bail in a case registered against him on 5.10.2009 alleging commission of offences under Sections 420, 120- B, 193, 194, 195 and 196 IPC at Police Station Bhadaur, District Barnala. The case has been registered on the complaint of Nachhattar Singh @ Khanda. It is alleged by him that he had taken the land of Sukhdev Singh on lease in the year 1996. While irrigating the rented land, a scuffle took place between Amarjit Singh and Jagsir Singh (deceased) son of Sukhdev Singh. Sukhdev Singh got a case registered against Nachhattar Singh – now complainant and son of Nachhattar Singh, namely, Jagsir Singh alleging that Jagsir Singh son of Sukhdev Singh had been kidnapped. Jagsir Singh son of Sukhdev Singh, it was alleged, was killed. Gurdev Singh and Jeeta Singh sons of Chuhar Singh and Surjit Singh son of Kishan Singh identified the unknown body recovered from the canal as that of Cr. Misc. No.M-10944 of 2010 [2] Jagsir Singh son of Sukhdev Singh. Nachhattar Singh – complainant, his son – Jagsir Singh as well as Nikka Singh, Surjit Singh and Amarjit Singh were tried for the offence of murder of Jagsir Singh son of Sukhdev Singh. The complainant – Nachhattar Singh and others were convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Barnala. They filed an appeal in this Court and during the pendency of the appeal, Jagsir Singh son of Sukhdev Singh who was reported to have died, was found to be alive by the Police of Police Station Rai Kot. On this, FIR 171 dated 18.12.2008 for the offences under Sections 420, 195, 211, 465, 467, 471 and 120-B IPC was registered on the complaint of Nachhattar Singh. It was during consideration of the appeal by this Court that a FIR was ordered to be registered. The petitioner is the maternal uncle of Jagsir Singh who is reported to have died. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was not instrumental in registration of the case against Nachhattar Singh and his son and others. He did not appear before the Police during investigation nor make any statement before the Police. He was not one of the prosecution witnesses in the earlier case. The learned Additional Sessions Judge has noticed the contentions of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor that the petitioner himself confessed that false story has been built-up at his instance to have the complainant convicted, however, the said confession has been made before the Police. The prosecution is to establish its case against the petitioner. Keeping in view the fact that the petitioner has not appeared in the earlier case to identify the dead body or had deposed before the trial Court he is entitled to the concession of bail. Cr. Misc. No.M-10944 of 2010 [3] Accordingly, the criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed and the petitioner on his furnishing personal bond and surety to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barnala shall be admitted to bail. July 19, 2010. (S.S. Saron) Judge *hsp*