Crl. Misc No. M 5520 OF 2011 ****** Het Ram vs State of Haryana and another Present : Mr. S.K.Yadav, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Manmohan Sikka, DAG Haryana for respondent No.1. Mr. S.N.Yadav, Advocate for the complainant. Ms. Ashima Mor, Advocate, for U.T.Chandigarh. ******* The petitioner seeks grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.282, dated 31.8.2010, registered under Sections 341, 363, 366-A, 34, 506, 216, 120-B of the IPC, and Sections 24, 27, 54, 59 of the Arms Act, at Police Station City Narnaul, District Mohindergarh. In terms of the order dated 30.5.2011, the report of Ms. Ashima Mor, Advocate has been perused. As per the report, the girl is now living with her father and the son of the petitioner is in custody. The question before this Court is whether the petitioner deserves the concession of anticipatory bail. Counsel for the complainant has argued that the petitioner was also involved in this heinous act where a married man kidnapped a young girl and kept her in his illegal custody for eight months. In my considered opinion, there is no allegation that the petitioner himself was interested in kidnapping the girl. The allegation is against the son of the petitioner. As regards the complicity of the petitioner, that is a matter of evidence but at this stage, in my opinion his custodial Crl.Misc No. M 5520 of 2011 :2: interrogation would not be required since the victim has been recovered and the main culprit is behind bars. In the circumstances, in the event of his arrest, the petitioner shall be released on anticipatory bail by the Investigating Officer to his satisfaction subject to the conditions as contained in Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. Petition stands disposed of. ( AJAY TEWARI ) July 14, 2011. JUDGE `kk'