Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. Cr.M.P.(M) No.218 of 2010 & Cr.M.P.(M) No.219 of 2010. Dated of Decision: April 21, 2010. 1. Cr.M..P.(M) No.218 of 2010. Lalit Jindal . ..… Petitioner. Versus State of H.P . ……. Respondent. 2. Cr.M..P.(M) No.219 of 2010. Ruchit Mahajan. ..… Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. ……. Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioners : Mr. M.S. Chandel, Sr. Advocate with Mr. N.S. Chandel, Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr. A.K. Bansal, Addl. Advocate General. Surinder Singh, J (oral): The above titled bail applications are arising out from the same FIR, hence taken up together for its decision. The instant applications have been moved by the petitioners for their enlargement on bail, under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as they are apprehending their arrest in FIR No.45/2010, registered on 12.3.2010 in the 2 Police Station Sadar Solan, H.P., under Sections 214, 465, 467, 468, 120-B and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. Report filed. Heard. The petitioners are alleged to have withdrawn an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- from the State Bank of Patiala, Chandigarh on 11th March, 2010 for being offered as a bribe to the complainant to execute a favourable affidavit in favour of the main accused. Reference to the last orders dated 23.3.2010, 31.3.2010 and 5.4.2010, the petitioners have joined the investigation of this case and supplied the details of the amount withdrawn from the bank by their employee Javed, allegedly for disbursement of the salary to their employees and office expenses. The present petitioners were not present at the time when the alleged recovery of amount was effected by the police alongwith proposed affidavit to be executed by the complainant. The bail is objected to by the learned Additional Advocate General, on the ground that the source of balance amount of Rs.5,50,000/- is yet to be verified and further that the specimen handwritings of the petitioners are also required to be taken, for the purposes of comparison of the handwritings, which is found on the reverse side of the stamp paper at the time of purchase of the land. On this ground, the bail of the petitioners cannot be denied, as such the 3 applications for their pre-arrest bail are allowed. The interim bail granted on 23.3.2010, is hereby confirmed on the same terms and conditions. Needless to say that in case the petitioners would infract any of the conditions, the liberty of bail shall be cancelled Both the applications stand disposed of. April 21, 2010. (Surinder Singh) (Pds) Judge.