IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc.-M No. 22676 of 2011(O&M) Date of Decision: 16.09.2011 Rattan Singh and another ...Petitioners Versus State of Punjab ..Respondent CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. S.S. Momi, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. P.S. Bajwa, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. ..... RAJESH BINDAL, J. While issuing of notice of motion on 11.08.2011, following contentions of learned counsel for the petitioners were noticed:- “Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that electric connection of tubewell installed in the name of grand-father of the petitioners, was transferred in the name of their father in the year 2003, though their father had expired in 1987. The FIR has been got registered against the petitioners by their brother alleging that they were instrumental in getting the electric connection transferred in the name of their father after his death. However, the fact is that the petitioners never made any application for transfer of electric connection. Due to family fraction, false FIR has been got registered against the petitioners.” It is not disputed by the learned counsel for the State that the petitioners have already joined investigation. Considering the aforesaid facts, interim bail granted to the peti- tioners on 11.08.2011, is made absolute. The petition stands disposed of. (RAJESH BINDAL) JUDGE 16.09.2011 sharmila