CRM-M No.16683 of 2011 *** Nihal Singh and others Vs. State of Haryana Present: Mr. M.S. Randhawa, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Man Mohan Sikka, D.A.G., Haryana. **** After arguing for some time, learned counsel for the petitioners prays for permission to withdraw this petition qua petitioner No.1. Allowed as prayed for. Dismissed as withdrawn qua petitioner No.1. This petition has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in case F.I.R. No.88 dated 13.06.2010 registered under Sections 395, 323, 353, 186, 34 IPC and Sections 130, 135 of the ARP Act at Police Station Nangal Chaudhary, District Mahendergarh. On 27.05.2011 the following contention was noticed:- “Learned counsel has argued that the petitioners were never summoned during the investigation and now challan has been presented and, therefore, custodial interrogation would not be required.” CRM-M No.16683 of 2011 -2- On instructions from ASI Daya Nand learned Deputy Advocate General is not in a position to deny that during the pendency of the FIR for almost one year the petitioners were not arrested and now the challan has been presented. In my opinion, now the custodial interrogation of petitioners No.2 to 5 are not required. On petitioners No.2 to 5 appearances they would be admitted to bail to the satisfaction of the trial Court. Petition stands allowed qua petitioners No.2 to 5. ( AJAY TEWARI ) MAY 31, 2011 JUDGE ashish