IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 1. Crl. Misc. No. M-12692 of 2010(O&M) Date of Decision: May 28, 2010. Harinderjit Singh ...... PETITIONER(s) Versus State of Punjab ...... RESPONDENT(s) 2. Crl. Misc. No. M-13151 of 2010(O&M) Dharminder Singh ...... PETITIONER(s) Versus State of Punjab ...... RESPONDENT(s) CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr. Atul Lakhanpal, Sr.Advocate with Mr. Arjun Lakhanpal, Advocate for the petitioner in Crl.M.N.M-12692 of 2010 Mr. Pawan Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner in Crl.M.N.M-13151 of 2010 Mr. Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala, AAG, Punjab. ***** RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) CRM No.M-12692 of 2010 This order will dispose of both the aforementioned petitions filed for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure in FIR No. 66 dated 02.04.2010, under Sections 420/467/468/471/120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Sahnewal, District Ludhiana. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record. This Court while issuing notice of motion on 03.05.2010 in Crl. Misc. No.M- 12692 of 2010 passed the following order:- “Crl.M.No.22795 of 2010 Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Crl.M.No.M-12692 of 2010 Argues that dispute between the petitioner and complainant is that of landlord and tenant and that petitioner is in possession of premises in dispute for the last ten years as tenant. Further argues that petitioner had already got registered two cases bearing FIR no.115 dated 17.7.2009 under Sections 457, 380, 511, 120-B IPC, and no.120 dated 21.7.2009, under Sections 448, 511, 34 IPC and 25/54/59 of Arms Act, both registered at Police Station Sahnewal, District Ludhiana City, against husband of complainant and his son and that the present FIR has been lodged just to pressurise the petitioner. It is further contended that alleged forged document is already in possession of the police. Notice of motion for 28.5.2010. However, petitioner is directed to join the investigation and in case he is arrested, he shall be released on interim bail by the Arresting Officer to his satisfaction subject to compliance of conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.” This Court while issuing notice of motion on 10.05.2010 in Crl. Misc. No.M- 13151 of 2010 passed the following order:- 2 CRM No.M-12692 of 2010 “Crl.M.No.23540 of 2010 Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Crl.M.No.M-13151 of 2010 Argues that dispute between husband of complainant and co-accused of petitioner is that of landlord and tenant on the plea that co-accused of the petitioner is in possession of premises for the last ten years as tenant. Further contended that there are no specific allegations against the petitioner and that he has not even been named in the FIR. It is further contended that he has been falsely implicated in this case as he is a witness in another case instituted against the husband of the complainant by co- accused of the petitioner. Further contended that main accused, namely, Harinderjit Singh has already been granted interim bail by this Court in Crl.M.No.M-12692 of 2010, which is pending for 28.5.2010. Notice of motion for 28.5.2010. However, petitioner is directed to join the investigation and in case he is arrested, he shall be released on interim bail by the Arresting Officer to his satisfaction subject to compliance of conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. To be heard alongwith Crl.M.No.M-12692 of 2010.” It has been stated by learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioners have already joined the investigation pursuant to said orders dated 03.05.2010 and 10.05.2010. It has also been stated by learned counsel for the State, on instruction from ASI.Chananjit Singh, that petitioners have joined the investigation and that they are no more required for any custodial interrogation. 3 CRM No.M-12692 of 2010 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 on behalf of Harinderjit Singh and Dharminder Singh, are accepted and orders dated 03.05.2010 and 10.05.2010 granting interim bail in favour of the petitioners are, hereby, made absolute subject to compliance of conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. The present petitions stand disposed of accordingly. ( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) May 28, 2010. JUDGE 'om' 4