CRM No.M-31535 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:-9.11.2010 Harvinder Singh son of Surjit Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR Present:- Mr.K.S.Bassi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Shilesh Gupta, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. M ehinder S ingh S ullar , J . (Oral) Invoking the provisions of section 439 Cr.PC. petitioner Harvinder Singh son of Surjit Singh, has directed the present petition for regular bail in a case registered against him alongwith his other co-accused, namely, Sanjay Kumar, Kamaljit Kaur, Gurpreet Singh and Shayam Singh, vide FIR No.152 dated 27.8.2010, on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC, by the police of Police Station Division No.6, Industrial Area, Ludhiana. 2. Notice of the petition was issued to the State. 3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, after going through the record with their valuable help and after deep consideration of the matter, to my mind, the present petition deserves to be accepted in this context. 4. What is not disputed here is that the petitioner is a purchaser of the property in dispute. He has already filed a civil suit with regard to the present subject matter. Not only that, all the offences alleged against the petitioner are triable by the Court of Magistrate. As even the challan has not yet been submitted by the police, therefore, conclusion of trial will naturally take long time. The CRM No.M-31535 of 2010 2 petitioner was arrested on 28.8.2010 and since then he is in judicial custody. No useful purpose would be served to further detain him in jail. Moreover, there is no history of previous involvement of the petitioner in any criminal case. Bail is the rule and custody is an exception in such like cases. 5. So, taking into consideration the totality of the facts and circumstances, emanating from the record, as discussed here-in-above, to me, the present petitioner is entitled to regular bail in the obtaining circumstances of the present case. 6. In the light of the aforesaid reasons 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, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate or in his absence, the Duty Magistrate, Ludhiana. 7. The instant petition is disposed of accordingly. 9.11.2010 (Mehinder Singh Sullar) AS Judge