CRM-M No. 7110 of 2011 **** Raj Kanwal Kaur vs. State of Haryana CRM-M No. 8449 of 2011 Ravinder Sekhon and another vs. State of Haryana Present: Mr. Baldev Singh, Senior Advocate with Mr. Anhul Singh, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Mr. A.K.Walia, Advocate. Mr.Man Mohan Singh, DAG, Haryana. **** On 22.03.2011 the following order was passed. “This is a petition for anticipatory bail filed in case bearing FIR No. 50 dated 26.02.2011, under Sections 323, 342, 506, 120-B IPC and Sections 16 and 18 of the Bonded Labour System(Abolition) Act, 1976, registered at Police Station Sector 5, Panchkula. The allegations are that the petitioners had kept in their house two young girls aged 8 and 5 respectively and were forcing them to do hard labour, mistreating them and not even making any payment to them. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners states that the children had been sent to the petitioners' house with the consent of their parents and that they are ready to produce the two fathers of the two girls and themselves appear before the investigating officer also to corroborate this fact. Learned DAG, on instructions from SI Mahavir Singh, has, however, countered by saying that FIR discloses a very serious offence and the concession of anticipatory bail should not be granted to these petitioners. In my considered opinion, to balance both the sets of arguments it would be appropriate if the conditional anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioners with a direction to CRM-M No. 7110 of 2011 and -2- CRM-M No. 8449 of 2011 them to produce fathers of the two minor girls before the investigating officer and to themselves appear before the investigating officer so as to enable the investigating officer to get a complete picture. Learned counsel undertakes that petitioners will appear before the investigating officer along with the two fathers of the two minor girls on 05.04.2011 between 11.00 a.m to 4.00 p.m. and on any other date which may be required by the investigating officer. Adjourned to 02.05.2011. In the meantime arrest of the petitioners shall remain stayed in terms of what has been stated above.” Learned Senior counsel has argued that the petitioner(s) appeared before the investigating officer with the father of two girls who have accepted the fact that the two girls had been voluntarily sent to the son of petitioner(s). In the circumstances I deem it appropriate to grant the concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner(s) who shall, in the event of their arrest, release them on bail to his satisfaction subject to the conditions envisaged under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.. Petition stands disposed of. A copy of this order be placed on the file of the connected case. ( AJAY TEWARI ) JUDGE May 02, 2011 sunita