IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM M-29922 of 2009 Date of Decision:10.3.2010 Kultar Singh .... Petitioner Versus State of Haryana .... Respondent CORAM: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur Present: Mr. R.K. Singla, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sanjeev Sura, Addl. A.G. Haryana. **** 1.Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? NIRMALJIT KAUR, J. As per the allegation, the petitioner alongwith other four persons was present near the shop of the complainant and it is alleged that they have committed theft by taking Rs.67,000/- from the cash box. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State states that no doubt the petitioner has since joined the investigation but he is not co- operating. Recovery is yet to be effected and he is required for further interrogation. The allegations are of theft. Grant of anticipatory bail will scuttle the investigation. Dismissed. 10.3.2010 ( NIRMALJIT KAUR ) rajeev JUDGE