CRM-M No. 8245 of 2011 **** Karamjit Singh vs. State of Punjab Present: Mr. Vivek Dadwal, Advocate for the petitioner. Dr. U. S. Dhaliwal, Addl. AG, Punjab. **** This is a petition for anticipatory bail filed in case bearing FIR No. 13 dated 11.2.2011, under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003 registered at Police Station Anti Theft, Jalandhar. On the last date the following contention was noticed:- “Counsel for the petitioner states that the only reason why anticipatory bail was declined to the petitioner because he had 50% of the disputed amount without prejudice.” Learned Addl. AG has argued that in the present case there was objective evidence to show tampering of meter. Be that as it may, on that very analogy the custodial interrogation of the petitioner would not be required. In case the petitioner is found guilty by a competent Court he would be liable for the punishment which maybe awarded. Consequently I deem it appropriate to grant the concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. In the event of his arrest , he is ordered to be released on bail to the satisfaction of SHO/Investigating Officer, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. Petition stands disposed of. ( AJAY TEWARI ) JUDGE May 05, 2011 sunita