Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. Cr.M.P.(M) No.1051 of 2008. Dated of Decision: October 23, 2008. Gulzari Lal. …..… Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. ……. Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? No For the Petitioner: Mr. Mohan Singh, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr. J.S. Guleria, Law Officer. Surinder Singh, J (oral): The petitioner has been arrested in FIR No.306/08 dated 29.8.08, under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. His application for bail was rejected by the learned Additional Sessions Judge on 4.10.2008. Now the instant application has been filed for seeking the bail. The petitioner was Assistant Lineman in the Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board, Paonta Sahib. He is alleged to have taken a loan in his own name and also three loans under the fictitious names. Further he also stood guarantor in his own name and also under the assumed names in 10/15 other loan cases of the same bank. The FIR was lodged against him by Shri Hira Singh Tomar, the Manager of the State Cooperative Bank, Paonta Sahib. On the investigation of this case, it came to light that except one loan in his own name, he was found to have been involved in other twenty 2 cases of loan, where he either stood guarantor under fictitious identity or had taken the loan from the said bank under the assumed names. He also forged the certificate of the D.D.O., Account opening card and the identity cards. He was assisted by one Ravinder Kumar Dhiman, who used to fill in the loan forms for which he was also paid substantial amount. In some of the cases, the petitioner pretended himself to be Harnam Singh, Sita Ram, Darshan Singh and Rajvir, whereas no such persons were found employed in the department of H.P.S.E.B. The bank is alleged to have cheated of lacks of rupees by hatching a conspiracy by the petitioner in connivance with his co- accused. The investigation of this case is still going on. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, he is ready and willing to furnish the bail bonds as per the direction of this court, but according to Shri J.S. Guleria, learned Law Officer, in case the petitioner is granted the bail, he will tamper the prosecution evidence and may also jump out the bail. Considering the allegations against the petitioner and also the stage of the investigation, the petitioner has no case for bail, accordingly, it is dismissed. October 23, 2008. (Surinder Singh) (Pds) Judge.