CRM No.M-30805 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:-19.11.2010 Darbara Singh s/o Rattan Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR Present:- Mr.Ashok Jindal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Jaspreet Singh, A.A.G., Punjab. M ehinder S ingh S ullar , J . (Oral) Invoking the provisions of section 438 Cr.PC, petitioner Darbara Singh son of Rattan Singh, has applied for grant of anticipatory bail in a case registered against him alongwith his other co-accused, namely, Kuldeep Kaur, Harjit Singh, Bhinder Singh and Darshan Singh, vide FIR No.260 dated 18.9.2010 (Annexure P1), on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under sections 406, 420, 465, 466, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC by the police of Police Station Payal, District Ludhiana. 2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, going through the record with their valuable assistance and after considering the matter deeply, to my mind, the present petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in this context. 3. While issuing notice of motion, the petitioner was directed to join the investigation. At the very outset, the learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Gurmit Singh, 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. 4. What is not disputed here is that neither the petitioner is the beneficiary of the impugned transaction nor any other role or overt act is attributed CRM No.M-30805 of 2010 2 to him. According to the prosecution that he signed the agreement to sell executed by the complainant in favour of Kuldip Kaur, co-accused of the petitioner. There is no history of previous involvement of the petitioner in any other criminal case. Moreover, all the offences alleged against him are triable by the Court of Magistrate. 5. So, taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner is only an attesting witness of the agreement to sell and totality of other facts and circumstances, emanating from the record, as detailed 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, the present petition for anticipatory bail is allowed in the obtaining circumstances of the instant case. 6. 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. 7. 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. 19.11.2010 (Mehinder Singh Sullar) AS Judge