IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-15449 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: May 23, 2011 Ranjit Singh alias Rana …Petitioner Versus State of Punjab … Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH 1. Whether reporters of local news papers may be Allowed to see judgment? 2. To be referred to reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr. Tejinder Pal Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Alok Singh, J. (Oral) Learned counsel for the petitioner states that during the trial, prosecution has moved an application for framing charge under Section 450 of the Indian Penal Code, although no challan was submitted under Section 450 IPC. Learned counsel further states that petitioner has an apprehension in his mind that Trial Court shall frame the charge under Section 450 IPC. He further states that since offence punishable under Section 450 IPC is non-bailable, therefore, petitioner shall be taken into custody by the Trial Court, therefore, present petition is moved seeking anticipatory bail. CRM M-15449 of 2011 Learned counsel for the petitioner states that in view of the judgment of this Court in the case of Sonu @ Rinku @ Lambu versus State of Punjab, reported in 2011 (2) RCR (Criminal) 392, petitioner shall move proper application before the learned Trial Court to admit the petitioner on bail on furnishing fresh bail bond and surety bonds for an offence punishable under Section 450 IPC. Therefore, present petition be dismissed as withdrawn. Present petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. May 23, 2011 ( Alok Singh ) vkd Judge 2