IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M- 7582 of 2010(O&M) Date of Decision: 22.04.2010. Nischal Puri ...... PETITIONER Versus State of Punjab ...... RESPONDENT CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr. Sandeep Suri, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala, AAG, Punjab. Mr. G.S.Toor, Advocate for the complainant. ***** RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) The present petition has been filed for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure in FIR No.12, dated 15.01.2010, under Sections 406/420/408/406/467/468/472/120-B IPC, registered at P.S. Barnala. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record. This Court while issuing notice of motion on 15.03.2010 passed the following order:- “Argues that petitioner was employed only as Sales Manager and he was having no concern with the alleged Crl.M.No.M-7582 of 2010 disbursement of loan to the complainant and the cheques taken as security. Further contended that only three cheques were taken as security and the disputed cheque was never taken as a security. It is further contended that cheque was duly issued by the complainant in favour of Tajinder Singh Jagal, which was duly signed by him and the amount was also credited in his account only. It is further contended that he instituted various other civil proceedings and a criminal complaint as well and that in the complaint filed before Consumer Court the petitioner was not made a party. Notice of motion for 22.4.2010. However, petitioner is directed to join the investigation and in case he is arrested, he shall be released on interim bail by the Arresting Officer to his satisfaction subject to compliance of conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.” It has been stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has already joined the investigation pursuant to said order dated 15.03.2010. It has also been stated by learned counsel for the State, on instruction from ASI. Nazeer Mohd., that petitioner has joined the investigation and that he is no more required for any custodial interrogation. There are no allegations on behalf of the State that petitioner is likely to abscond or that he is likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts in the Court, if released on bail. Hence, in view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the anticipatory bail application filed by Nischal Puri is accepted and order dated 15.03.2010 granting interim bail to him is, hereby, made absolute subject to compliance of conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. 2 Crl.M.No.M-7582 of 2010 The present petition stands disposed of accordingly. ( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) April 22, 2010. JUDGE 'om' 3