IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM No.M 32685 of 2010 Date of decision: 7.12.2010 Dalip Singh and another ...Petitioners Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr.SP Soi, Advocate for the petitioners Mr.KD Sachdeva, Addl.AG, Punjab Ms.Sushma Chopra, Advocate for the complainant. *** Ram Chand Gupta, J.(Oral) The present petition has been filed by petitioners Dalip Singh and Kuldip Singh under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure seeking anticipatory bail in case FIR No.247 dated 13.10.2010 registered under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC at Police Station Shahkot, Jalandhar. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record. This Court while issuing notice of motion on 16.11.2010 passed the following order:- “Crl.M.No.58109 of 2010 Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Crl.M.No.M 32685 of 2010 Contends that dispute between the parties is civil in nature. Further contends that main accused is Gurdip Singh Bajwa, who has already been arrested in this case. Further contends that petitioners are not in any way beneficiaries of the CRM No.M 32685 of 2010 -2- agreement to sell on the basis of which suit for possession by way of specific performance has already been filed by Gurdip Singh and that petitioners are only witnesses to the said agreement. It is also submitted that thumb impression of complainant and signatures of son of complainant on the agreement are not disputed. Notice of motion for 7.12.2010. However, petitioners are directed to join the investigation and in case they are arrested, they shall be released on interim bail by the Arresting Officer to his satisfaction subject to compliance of conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.” It has been stated by learned counsel for the petitioners that they have already joined the investigation pursuant to said order dated 16.11.2010. It has also been stated by learned counsel for the State that the petitioners have joined the investigation and that they are no more required for any custodial interrogation. There are no allegations on behalf of the State that petitioners are likely to abscond or that they are likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts in the Court, if released on bail. Hence, in view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the anticipatory bail petition filed on behalf of petitioners Dalip Singh and Kuldip Singh is accepted and order dated 16.11.2010 granting interim bail in favour of the petitioners is, hereby, made absolute subject to compliance of conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. December 7, 2010 (RAM CHAND GUPTA) gsv JUDGE