Crl.M.No.M-16750 of 2010 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. 1. Crl.M.No.M-16750 of 2010 (O&M) Anil Kumar Tiwari .....Petitioner v. State of Punjab .....Respondent 2. Crl.M.No.M-16751 of 2010 (O&M) Sunil Tiwari and another .....Petitioners v. State of Punjab .....Respondent 3. Crl.M.No.M-17014 of 2010 (O&M) Santosh Kumar Tiwari and another .....Petitioners v. State of Punjab ......Respondent Date of Decision: August 12, 2010 CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr.S.K.Bansal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr.K.D.Sachdeva, Addl. A.G, Punjab. Mr.K.S.Reiki, Advocate and Mr.V.K.Kaushal, Advocate for the complainant. ...... RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) This order will dispose of all the aforementioned petitions bearing Crl.M.Nos.16750, 16751 and 17014 of 2010, filed by petitioners- Anil Kumar Tiwari, Sunil Tiwari, Manoj Kumar Tiwari, Santosh Kumar Tiwari and Satish Tiwari, respectively, under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail to them in case FIR No.17, dated 12.2.2010, under Section 381/34 IPC, registered at Police Station Sultanwind, Amritsar. Crl.M.No.M-16750 of 2010 (O&M) -2- I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record carefully. A coordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.M.No.M-16750 of 2010, passed the following order on 10.6.2010: “ State counsel, on instructions, points out that the averment made in the petition can only be ascertained in case the petitioner appear and join investigation. The allegation of theft or if it is a counter-blast to payment of non-wages can accordingly be ascertained only during the course of investigation. Adjourned to 19.7.2010. The petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer on 17.6.2010 at 10.00 a.m. In case, he does so, his arrest shall remain stayed till the next date of hearing.” On the same day, i.e., 10.6.2010, the same Bench passed the following separate order in Crl.M.Nos.M-16751 and 17014 of 2010: “ State counsel, on instructions, points out that the averment made in the petition can only be ascertained in case the petitioners appear and join investigation. The allegation of theft or if it is a counter-blast to payment of non-wages can accordingly be ascertained only during the course of investigation. Adjourned to 19.7.2010. The petitioners are directed to appear before the Investigating Officer on 17.6.2010 at 10.00 a.m. In case, they do so, their arrest shall remain stayed till the next date of hearing.” It has been stated by learned counsel for the petitioners that pursuant to the said orders, the petitioners have already joined the investigation. It has been stated by learned State counsel as well that the petitioners have joined the investigation and that they are no more required for any custodial interrogation by the police. It has also been stated by both the learned counsel for the complainant that dispute was between employers and the workers and the same has been amicably settled. Crl.M.No.M-16750 of 2010 (O&M) -3- There are no allegations on behalf of the State that petitioners are likely to abscond or that they are 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, orders dated 10.6.2010, granting interim bail to petitioners-Anil Kumar Tiwari, Sunil Tiwari, Manoj Kumar Tiwari, Santosh Kumar Tiwari and Satish Tiwari, are, hereby made absolute subject to the compliance of conditions contained in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. All the present petitions stand disposed of accordingly. 12.8.2010 (Ram Chand Gupta) meenu Judge