CRM-M No.38334 of 2010 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh. CRM-M No.38334 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: 04.04.2011 Jagnandan Singh ....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.J.S. Chahal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. K.D. Sachdeva, Addl. A.G., Punjab for the State. ... Alok Singh, J (Oral). This is an application seeking anticipatory bail in case FIR No.135 dated 16.12.2010 under Sections 420/467/468/471/120-B IPC, P.S. Bhadur, District Barnala. This Court on 24.12.2011 has passed the following order:- “ Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the case by aid of Section 120-B IPC only. As per allegations in the FIR, the only role attributed CRM-M No.38334 of 2010 2 to the petitioner is that he identified one Labh Singh son of Kehar Singh, an Ex-serviceman and who is Ramgarhia and a resident of village Ubhewal, District Sangrur who has retired from the Army and is still alive, whereas the petitioner has identified one Labh Singh son of Kehar Singh resident of Village Talwandi, who is also an Ex-serviceman. Learned counsel further submits that the case is based on documentary evidence and all the documents are in possession of the department. The petitioner is not required for custodial interrogation and nothing is to be recovered from him. Notice of motion for 7.3.2011. In the event of arrest, petitioner shall be released on interim anticipatory bail to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer. He shall join the investigation as and when he is required by the Investigating Officer. He shall also comply with the conditions as envisaged under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which are as under:- (i) that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer and when required; (ii) that the petitioner 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, (iii) that the petitioner shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court.” Learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab on the CRM-M No.38334 of 2010 3 instructions of ASI Jagdeep Singh states that the petitioner has joined investigation and his custodial interrogation is not required at this stage. Learned counsel for the complainant vehemently argued that in fact Labh Singh son of Kehar Singh was a retired Sepoy from the Military, who died on 8.8.1995, while the motor was got installed after forging the signatures of his deceased father and the same was sold on 9.8.2006 to Jangir Singh and Darshan Singh. He has further argued that although no wrongful loss is caused to the complainant, the accused have played fraud with the Electricity Department by forging the signatures of the deceased father of the complainant. Considering totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, present petition is allowed. Order dated 24.12.2010 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. ( Alok Singh ) Judge 04.04.2011 sk.