Crl.M.No.M-7020 of 2010 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl.M.No.M-7020 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: May 14, 2010 Vijay Kumar .....Petitioner v. State of Punjab ......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr.P.S.Ahluwalia, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala, AAG,Punjab. ...... 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.163, dated 11.9.2009, registered under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, at Police Station Sahnewal, Ludhiana. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record carefully. This Court while issuing notice of motion on 10.3.2010, passed the following order: “ Argues that petitioner has not been named in the FIR and that he has been falsely implicated on the alleged statement of co-accused. Notice of motion for 20.4.2010. However, petitioner is directed to join the investigation and in case he is arrested, he 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 petitioner that Crl.M.No.M-7020 of 2010 (O&M) -2- pursuant to the said order, the petitioner has already joined the investigation. It has been further contended that the alleged recovery of kerosene has already been effected from the co-accused. It has been stated by learned State counsel as well, on instructions from, Tara Chand, ASI, that the petitioner has joined the investigation and that he is no more required for any custodial interrogation by the police. However, bail application has been opposed merely on the ground that the vehicle from which recovery was effected was got released by the petitioner on superdari. There are no allegations on behalf of the State that 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. Hence, in view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, order dated 10.3.2010, granting interim bail to petitioner-Vijay Kumar, is, hereby confirmed subject to the compliance of conditions contained in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. The present petition stands disposed of accordingly. 14.5.2010 (Ram Chand Gupta) meenu Judge