Criminal Misc.No. M- 16884 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc.No. M- 16884 of 2010 Date of decision:- 21.7.2010 Parmilla Devi ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present:- Mr. Veneet Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. P.M. Anand, Addl. A.G. Haryana. RAM CHAND GUPTA J.(Oral) The present petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No.46 dated 2.3.2010, under Section 10 of Haryana Development and Regularisation of Urban Area Act No.8 of 1975 IPC, registered at Police Station Bhondsi, District Gurgaon. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record carefully. Co-ordinate Bench of this Court while issuing notice of motion on 04.6.2010, passed the following order:- “The allegations against the petitioner, who is a lady, are under the Haryana Development and Regularisation of Urban Area Act. She is accused of selling her own land, which is stated to be in violation of Section 10 of the said Act. Counsel points out that there was another FIR qua the land in the same area where the petitioner was granted anticipatory bail. Now another FIR has been Criminal Misc.No. M- 16884 of 2010 -2- registered for a land situated in the same area, which, according to the counsel would be a second FIR, which is impermissible under law. Notice of motion for 21.7.2010. In the meanwhile, in the event of arrest of the petitioner, she shall be released on anticipatory bail to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, subject to the conditions contained in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. She will join the investigation as and when required.” It has been stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has joined the investigation in pursuance of the said order. It has been stated by learned counsel for the respondent- State that the petitioner has joined the investigation and is no more required for any custodial interrogation. There are no allegations on behalf of the State that the petitioner is likely to abscond or that he is likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts in the Court, if released on bail. In view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, order dated 04.6.2010, granting interim bail to the petitioner-Parmilla Devi, is, hereby made absolute subject to the compliance of conditions contained in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. The present petition stands disposed of accordingly. July 21, 2010 ( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) vj JUDGE