Crl. Misc. No. 18206 of 2009 and Crl. Misc. No. M-4113 of 2009 Sarabjit Kaur v. State of Punjab Present: Mr. Vikram K. Chaudhary, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sudhir Nehra, Addl. A.G., Punjab. *** Crl. Misc. No. 18206 of 2009 The copies of the discharge slips (Annexures P10 and P11) attached with the Crl. Misc. application are taken on record subject to just exceptions. Crl. Misc. stands disposed of. Crl. Misc. No. M-4113 of 2009 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been a patient of Proplase Intervertebral Disc problem. It is submitted that in compliance to the order dated 4.3.2009, the petitioner has appeared in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amritsar and furnished her bail bonds. In view of the aforesaid position, it is submitted that the order dated 4.3.2009 granting interim bail to the petitioner be made absolute. After giving my thoughtful consideration to the matter, it may be noticed that earlier application seeking anticipatory bail was declined by this Court vide order dated 6.2.2008. In any case, the petitioner was not arrested by the police and she joined the investigation. Thereafter, challan (Annexure P6) was filed by the police on 10.9.2008. In the said challan, the petitioner was declared innocent and was not sent up for trial. Thereafter, the police filed a supplementary challan (Annexure P8) on 18.11.2008 in which the petitioner, it is alleged, has been found liable for the Crl. Misc. No. 18206 of 2009 and [2] Crl. Misc. No. M-4113 of 2009 purchase of land of Jaipal Singh vide sale deeds dated 23.4.1997 and 15.2.2001 through the attorney of Jaipal Singh namely Kulwant Singh who is the brother of the petitioner. The petition had been filed seeking quashing of the supplementary challan dated 18.11.2008 (Annexure P8). Learned counsel submits that the contentions as raised for seeking quashing of the supplementary challan (Annexure P8) would be raised at the appropriate stage before the trial Court itself. Therefore, he does not press the petition seeking quashing of the supplementary challan (Annexure P8). It is, however, submitted that during investigation, the petitioner was not arrested and now the petitioner is not liable to be taken in custody. However, the petitioner apprehends that in view of the order dated 27.11.2008 (Annexure P9) passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amritsar, the petitioner would be arrested as warrants of arrest have been issued against her. It is not in dispute that the petitioner has appeared before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amritsar and furnished her bail bonds. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of with the direction that the petitioner during the pendency of the trial shall remain on bail on such terms and conditions as may be imposed by the learned trial Court and subject to her furnishing personal bond and surety to its satisfaction. (S.S. SARON) JUDGE April 16, 2009 amit