Crl.M.No.M-9590 of 2010 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl.M.No.M-9590 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: May 10, 2010 Mahesh Yadav .....Petitioner v. State of Haryana ......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr.Vinod S.Bhardwaj, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.P.M.Anand, Addl.A.G., Haryana. ...... RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) The present petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No.219, dated 7.6.2007, registered under Sections 406, 420 and 120-B IPC, at Police Station Sadar, District Gurgaon. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record carefully. This Court while issuing notice of motion on 31.3.2010, passed the following order: “Crl.M.No.17154 of 2010 Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Crl.M.No.M-9590 of 2010 Argues that sale-deed was executed for Rs.13 lacs and that entire amount was admittedly received by the complainant. Further argues that regarding dishonour of cheque for Rs.7 lacs, which was allegedly issued by the present petitioner in his favour, he has already filed complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Notice of motion for 10.5.2010. Crl.M.No.M-9590 of 2010 (O&M) -2- 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. ” It has been stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that pursuant to the said order, the petitioner has already joined the investigation. It has been stated by learned State counsel as well, on instructions from, Karan Singh, SI, that the petitioner has joined the investigation and that he is no more required for any custodial interrogation by the police. It has also been stated by learned State counsel that State has filed cancellation report before the Illaqa Magistrate. There are no allegations on behalf of the State that petitioner is likely to abscond or that he is likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts in the Court, if released on bail. In view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, order dated 31.3.2010, granting interim bail to petitioner-Mahesh Yadav, is, hereby confirmed subject to the compliance of conditions contained in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. The present petition stands disposed of accordingly. 10.5.2010 (Ram Chand Gupta) meenu Judge