CRM No.M-26585 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:-1.10.2010 Narinder Gupta s/o Vijay Kumar ......Petitioner Versus State of Punjab .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR. Present: Mr.Puneet Sharma, Advocate for Mr.Sandeep Arora, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Shilesh Gupta, DAG Punjab. M EHINDER S INGH S ULLAR , J. (oral) Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, having gone through the record with their valuable assistance and after bestowal of thoughts over the entire matter, to my mind, the present petitioner is entitled to grant of anticipatory bail for the reasons mentioned here-in-below. 2. It is not a matter of dispute that the petitioner has already paid the amount in question and the complainant has sworn his affidavit to this effect. The parties have compromised the matter. The learned State counsel, on instructions from HC Dilbag Singh, has stated that the petitioner has already joined the investigation and he is no longer required for further interrogation at this stage. The offence alleged against the petitioner is triable by the Court of Magistrate. Moreover, there is no history of previous involvement of the petitioner in any such case. 3. Therefore, taking into consideration the totality of the facts and circumstances, emanating from the record, as discussed here-in-above and without commenting further anything on merits, lest it may prejudice the case of either side during the course of the trial of the case, the instant petition deserves to be allowed, in the obtaining circumstances of the case. CRM No.M-26585 of 2010 2 4. Consequently, it is directed that in the event of his arrest, the petitioner shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail and surety bonds in the sum of Rs.10,000/- to the satisfaction of Arresting Officer, subject to the conditions that (i) he shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Agency as and when required; (ii) 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer and (iii) he will not leave India without prior permission of the trial Court. 5. Needless to state that, in case, the petitioner does not cooperate or join the investigation, the prosecution would be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of his bail, in this respect. 6. The present petition is disposed of accordingly. 1.10.2010 (MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR) AS JUDGE