CRM No. M 12383 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -- CRM No. M 12383 of 2010 Date of decision: 25.03.2011 Harvinder Singh and others ........ Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others .......Respondent(s) Coram: Hon'ble Ms Justice Nirmaljit Kaur -.- Present: Mr. Anil K Ahluwalia, Advocate for the petitioners Mr. K S Pannu, DAG, Punjab for the respondent State Mr. K S Nalwa, Advocate for respondents No. 3 to 7 Mr. P S Mattewal, Advocate for respondent No. 8 -.- 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Nirmaljit Kaur, J. This is a petition under Section 439 (2) read with Section 482 Cr.P.C for cancellation of regular bail of respondents No. 3 to 7 granted vide order dated 09.03.2010 in FIR No. 75 dated 25.06.2008 under Sections 420, 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Dera Bassi and they be arrested again unless Rs.18,04,97,500/- be got deposited or recovered from respondents No. 3 to 7. CRM No. M 12383 of 2010 2 While praying for cancellation of the regular bail of respondents No. 3 to 7 granted vide order dated 09.03.2010 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Mohali (P-6), learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the Additional Sessions Judge, Mohali has wrongly ordered the release of respondents No. 3 to 7, whereas, huge amount is to be recovered from them. Moreover, the ADC, Mohali has dismissed the claim of ownership of Lamberdars over the land in dispute and the Additional Sessions Judge granted the bail to the private respondents without going through the revenue record. There is no substance in the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner in as much as the Additional District Judge granted bail to the accused while observing as under:- “The allegations against the applicants are yet to be proved. They are in custody for the last more than one month. Challan has not been filed till date, although said FIR was registered in June, 2008. No useful purpose would be served by detaining the accused/applicants behind the bars for indefinite period as presentation of challan and conclusion of its trial is likely to take sufficient time.” Moreover, the FIR is registered under Section 420 IPC, 120 B IPC. It is a regular bail. Learned counsel for the respondent has brought to the notice of the Court order dated 20.07.2010 passed by the Court vide which CRM 24636 M of 2010 praying for taking action against the respondents in the present FIR was dismissed as infructuous in view of the fact that challan has since been filed against the respondents herein. In view of the above, this Court finds no ground to cancel the CRM No. M 12383 of 2010 3 bail granted to the respondents No. 3 to 7 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Mohali, vide his order dated 09.03.2010 (P6). No other ground was raised. Dismissed. (Nirmaljit Kaur) Judge 25.03.2011 mohan