IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M- 6922 of 2010(O&M) Date of Decision: May 27, 2010. Preeti and another ...... PETITIONERS Versus State of Punjab ...... RESPONDENT CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr. Mohinder Singh Joshi, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala, AAG, Punjab. ***** RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) The present petition has been filed for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure in FIR No.168 dated 31.10.2009, under Sections 420/120-B IPC and Section 7 of Essential Commodities Act, registered at Police Station Julkan, District Patiala. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record. This Court while issuing notice of motion on 09.03.2010 passed the following order:- “Crl.M.No.12511 of 2010 Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. CRM NO.M-6922 of 2010 Crl.M.No.M 6922 of 2010 Argues that ration depot was in the name of husband of petitioner No.1, who was murdered, however, no action was taken by the police against the murderers of husband of petitioner No.1 and on pressure of those accused, the present case has been registered against the petitioners. It is further contended that depot was allotted in the name of petitioner No.1 after the death of her husband and petitioner No.2 is having no concern with the said depot. It is further contended that no stock of wheat was available in the depot after 28.10.2009. It is further contended that Food and Supply Controller, Patiala has not made any complaint against the alleged misappropriation and the wheat which has allegedly been shown to be recovered was not the property of the depot. Notice of motion for 22.04.2010. However, petitioners are directed to join the investigation and in case they are arrested, they shall be released on interim bail by the Arresting Officer to his satisfaction subject to compliance of conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C” It has been stated by learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioners have already joined the investigation pursuant to said order dated 09.03.2010. It has also been stated by learned counsel for the State, on instruction from HC.Manjit Singh, that petitioners have joined the investigation and that they are no more required for any custodial interrogation. There are no allegations on behalf of the State that petitioners are likely to abscond or that they are likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts in the Court, if released on bail. 2 CRM NO.M-6922 of 2010 Hence, in view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of Preeti and Sanju, is accepted and order dated 09.03.2010 granting interim bail in favour of the petitioner is, hereby, made absolute subject to compliance of conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. The present petition stands disposed of accordingly. ( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) May 27, 2010. JUDGE 'om' 3