In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ...... Criminal Misc. No.M-4798 of 2010 ..... Date of decision:18.2.2010 Gurdev Singh alias Chintu .....Petitioner v. State of Punjab .....Respondent .... Present: Mr. Sachin Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. ..... S.S. Saron, J. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in a case registered against him for the offences under Sections 379, 411, 420, 472 and 120-B IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the FIR in the case has been registered on the basis of secret information and the petitioner has no concern with the same. He was not present at the place of occurrence nor was he identified by anyone. From the perusal of the FIR even it is not clear as to who disclosed the presence of the petitioner at the place of the occurrence and as to how he left the place of occurrence. In any case, the recoveries in the case have already been effected and all the co- accused of the petitioner, who have been arrested, have been granted regular bail. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and also gone through the records of the case. The FIR (Annexure-P.1) has been registered on the statement of Cr. Misc. No.M-4798 of 2010 [2] secret information. The petitioner-Gurdev Singh as per prosecution case in connivance with his co-accused had been committing theft of vehicles and selling the same by affixing fake number plates on the vehicles. A raid was conducted by the Police party on the basis of secret information and four persons were apprehended at the spot. Gurdev Singh (petitioner) had succeeded in escaping. One motorcycle and a revolver of .45 bore along with six cartridges were recovered from Dharamvir Singh, a co-accused of the petitioner. Five other stolen motorcycles were recovered from another co-accused on the basis of disclosure statement. As per prosecution case, the petitioner is a member of a gang indulging in theft of vehicles. Keeping in view the nature of allegations and the involvement of the petitioner as also the fact that he was successful in getting away at the time when the raid was conducted, no ground for grant of pre-arrest bail is made out. The criminal miscellaneous petition is accordingly dismissed. February 18, 2010. (S.S. Saron) Judge *hsp*