CRM No. M-9766 of 2011 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM No. M-9766 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 19.04.2011 Rakesh Rani ....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present: - Mr. P.S. Sekhon, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Vikas Malik, AAG, Haryana. Mr. D.D. Sharma, Advocate, for the complainant. 1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? ***** ALOK SINGH, J (ORAL) This is an application seeking anticipatory bail in case FIR No.296 dated 24.12.2010 under Sections 420/408/467/468/471/506 of the Indian Penal Code, Police Station Bhuna, District Fatehabad. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that dispute is pertaining to the business transactions and civil dispute has been given colour of the criminal offence. Mr. D.D. Sharma, Advocate, appearing for the complainant has vehemently opposed the bail application. Learned counsel for the petitioner while placing reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra and others, 2011(1) RCR(Criminal) 126, has argued that irrational and indiscriminate arrest CRM No. M-9766 of 2011 (O&M) -2- must be avoided. He has further placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Dhariwal Tobacoo Products Ltd. Vs. State of Maharastra, 2009(2) SCC 370 and has argued that if civil dispute is given the colour of criminal offence, Court must come to the rescue of the accused. Considering totality of the facts and circumstances of the case present petition is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioner he shall be released on bail by the arresting officer on furnishing personal bond and one surety of Rs.20,000/- subject to the following conditions: - i) that he shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; ii) that he shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; iii) that he shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court. It is made clear that in the event of violation of any of the conditions, prosecution shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of the bail. (Alok Singh) Judge April 19, 2011 R.S.