IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-25634 of 2009 Date of decision : October 07, 2009 Bharpur Singh and another ....Petitioners versus State of Punjab ....Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice L.N. Mittal Present : Mr. KS Sidhu, Senior Advocate with Mr. M.S. Brar, Advocate, for the petitioners Mr. Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala, AAG Punjab with Mr. HR Nohria, Advocate, for the complainant L.N. Mittal, J. (Oral) Bharpur Singh and Resham Singh have filed this petition for anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 94 dated 2.9.2009 under sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, Police Station Sherpur, District Sangrur. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file. According to the prosecution version, both the petitioners who are brothers obtained copies of jamabandies of 10 farmers and got prepared documents in connivance with Krishan Chand Bansal for obtaining subsidy and loan for cultivation of medicinal plants. The farmers came to know of it when they received letters from Punjab State Medicinal Plants Board regarding sanction of subsidy and loan. However, six out of ten farmers have stated that the petitioners had got the loan and subsidy sanctioned with their consent but four farmers have stated that everything was done without their consent. Criminal Misc. No. M-25634 of 2009 -2- Learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently contended that nothing was done by petitioner no. 1 and it was only petitioner no. 2 who obtained the copies of jamabandies. Learned State counsel, on instructions from HC Mukhtiar Singh, admits that copies of jamabandies were obtained by petitioner no. 2 only. Learned counsel for the complainant contended that both the petitioners along with Krishan Chand Bansal got the documents prepared for sanction of subsidy and loan. Keeping in view all the circumstances but without meaning to express any opinion on merits, petitioner no. 2 does not deserve the concession of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the instant petition on behalf of petitioner no. 2 is dismissed. However, petition qua petitioner no. 1 is allowed. In the event of arrest, petitioner no. 1 shall be released on bail to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, subject to the condition that the petitioner shall join the investigation as and when required and shall comply with the conditions specified in section 438(2) Cr.P.C. Presently, petitioner no. 1 is directed to join investigation on 14.10.2009 at 10.00 AM and continue to do so as and when required by the police. The instant order qua petitioner no. 1 shall remain effective till one month after the filing of charge sheet by the police or till decision of regular bail petition of petitioner no. 1, whichever is earlier. The petition is disposed of accordingly. ( L.N. Mittal ) October 07, 2009 Judge 'dalbir'