CRM-M No.34181 of 2009 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh. CRM-M No.34181 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: 30.03.2011 Akwinder Kaur ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ....Respondents. Coram:- Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Singh 1.Whether reporters of local news papers may be allowed to see judgement ? 2. To be referred to reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ? Present: Mr. Vipul Aggarwal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. K.D. Sachdeva, Addl. A.G., Punjab for the State. Mr. M.S. Rana, Advocate for the complainant. ... Alok Singh, J (Oral). This is an application seeking anticipatory bail in case FIR No.181 dated 2.10.2009 under Sections 420 IPC, P.S. Sadar, Gurdaspur. Vide order dated 3.5.2010, this Court has referred the matter to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court to explore the possibility of compromise. CRM-M No.34181 of 2009 2 Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court vide report dated 16.9.2010 has reported that parties could not reach any amicable settlement in the Mediation proceedings. Learned Assistant Advocate General, Haryana, has argued that anticipatory bail application of co-accused Manjit Pal has already been dismissed by this Court vide order dated 20.1.2011. A perusal of the order dated 20.1.2011 passed by this Court on the application of co-accused Manjit Pal reveals that it has come on the record that Manjit Pal had deposited Rs.3,47,300/- in his Savings Bank Account, which he has allegedly received from the complaint. While in the present case, there seems to be no evidence against the petitioner. In the opinion of this Court, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, custodial interrogation of the petitioner seems to be totally unjustified as per the dictum of the Hon'ble the Apex Court in the matter of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra, 2011 (1) RCR (Criminal), 126 that ordinarily arrest should be the last option and it should be restricted to exceptional cases; irrational and indiscriminate arrests are gross violation of human rights. Whether petitioner has received any money by playing fraud on the pretext that petitioner shall send the complainant to foreign country, is a matter of evidence. Considering totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, present petition is allowed. Order dated 3.12.2009 is made absolute, subject to the limitations provided under Section 438(2) of the Code. Petitioner – accused shall participate in the investigation as and when he is required. CRM-M No.34181 of 2009 3 ( Alok Singh ) Judge 30.03.2011 sk.