CRM No.M-30810 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:-1.12.2010 Gurbinder Singh Gill son of Jagri Singh ...Petitioner Versus The State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR Present: Mr.Balbir Singh Jaswal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Jaspreet Singh, A.A.G., Punjab. M ehinder S ingh S ullar , J . (Oral) Petitioner Gurbinder Singh Gill son of Jagri Singh, has directed the present petition for anticipatory bail in a case registered against him alongwith his other co-accused, namely, Varinder Singh Hundal, vide FIR No.369 dated 5.9.2010 (Annexure P1), on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under sections 420, 511 and 120-B IPC, by the police of Police Station Division No.5, Civil Lines, Ludhiana, invoking the provisions of section 438 Cr.PC, 2. Notice of the petition was issued to the State. 3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, going through the record with their valuable help and after considering the entire matter deeply, to my mind, the present petition deserves to be accepted in this context. 4. At the very outset, the petitioner was directed to join the investigation. The learned State counsel, on instructions from SI Dev Raj, has submitted that the petitioner has already joined the investigation and he is no longer required for further interrogation at this stage. Nothing is to be recovered from him. 5. What is not disputed here is that as per allegations contained in the FIR (Annexure P1), the petitioner filed a civil suit on the basis of revoked power of attorney in the Court of Civil Judge, Ludhiana and appeal before Commissioner, Patiala and also filed false affidavit. On the basis of aforesaid allegations, the CRM No.M-30810 of 2010 2 present case was registered against the accused, in the manner indicated here-in- above. 6. Whether the power of attorney was revoked, what is its effect and whether the affidavit filed by the petitioner are false or not, are the subject matter in a civil suit pending in the Civil Court at Ludhiana. Once the indicated documents are under the scrutiny of civil court, in that eventuality, it cannot possibly be saith, at this stage, that the same are forged and fabricated, as urged by the prosecution. The dispute appears to be of civil nature. Moreover, all the offences alleged against the petitioner are triable by the Court of Magistrate. There is no history of previous involvement of the petitioner in any such case. 7. Therefore, taking into consideration the totality of the facts and circumstances, emanating from the record, as discussed here-in-above and without commenting further anything on merits, lest it may prejudice the case of either side during the course of the trial of the case, to me, the present petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in the obtaining circumstances of the instant case. 8. Consequently, it is directed that in the event of his arrest, the petitioner shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail and surety bonds in the sum of Rs.10,000/- to the satisfaction of Arresting Officer, subject to the conditions that (i) he shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Agency as and when required; (ii) he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer and (iii) he will not leave India without prior permission of the trial Court. 9. Needless to state that in case, the petitioner does not cooperate or join the investigation, the prosecution would be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of his bail, in this relevant connection. 1.12.2010 (Mehinder Singh Sullar) AS Judge