IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-21718 of 2009 (O/M). Date of Decision : October 22, 2009. Daljit Singh Khanna ...... Petitioner(s). Versus. State of Punjab ..... Respondent(s). CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH. Present:- Mr. Sanjiv Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Mr. A.D.S. Rai , A.A.G. Punjab, for respondent-State. Mr. K.P.S. Dhillon, Advocate, for complainant. AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL). Counsel for the petitioner states that in compliance of order dated 11.08.2009, passed by this Court, the petitioner had joined the investigation. This fact is not disputed by counsel for respondent-State, on instructions from S.I. Thura Ram, Police Station Sadar, Patiala. He further states that the petitioner is, as of now, not required for investigation purpose. Counsel for complainant vehemently argues that the petitioner is denying marriage with the complainant and also dis-owning the child, which has been born out of their wedlock and, therefore, contends that benefit of concession of bail should not be granted to the petitioner. I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the records of the case. Criminal Misc. No. M-21718 of 2009. A perusal of the records clearly show that earlier a complaint was filed by the complainant, which was subsequently withdrawn by her and an affidavit dated 26.06.2006 to that effect was also filed, which has been placed on record as Annexure-P-1. Keeping in view the totality of the fact and circumstances of the case, order dated 11.08.2009 is confirmed. However, the petitioner shall be bound by the provisions of Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C. Any observations made herein above, shall have no effect on the merits of the case. (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) JUDGE October 22, 2009. sjks. -2-