Crl. Misc. No. M- 1785 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M- 1785 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: February 11, 2010 Bhag Singh and others ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH Present: Mr. Mansur Ali, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. APS Brar, Sr. DAG, Punjab. GURDEV SINGH, J. Heard. The petitioners have filed this petition under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code for grant of anticipatory bail in FIR No. 136 dated 22.12.2009 registered at Police Station Bhadson, District Patiala, under Sections 379, 427, 283, 120-B IPC, on the grounds mentioned therein. It was on the application of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Gujjarheri that this FIR was registered against the petitioners. According to the complainant, the petitioners dismantled the pavement of the street made by the Gram Panchayat in the year 2008, uprooted the plants and that one of the petitioners removed the underground water pipes. It has not been denied by the State counsel that the matter was inquired into by the SDO, who mentioned in his report that pipes are still lying at the spot. However, it contended that the petitioners had removed Crl. Misc. No. M- 1785 of 2010 2 the bricks from the street and encroached upon the same by raising the walls, which were previously demolished by the administration with the help of bulldozer. He has not been able to substantiate his contention by means of any document. The petitioners have placed on record the documents to the effect that a civil suit has already been filed regarding the property in dispute. It appears that there is a party faction in the village. One wing is being headed by the complainant. It is very much clear from Annexure P/12 that other party had made an application to the Deputy Commissioner, Patiala, for conducting an inquiry regarding the facts of the complainant. When there is such a party faction in the village and the matter is already before the civil court, whose decision would be binding on the criminal court, I think it is a fit case, where the petitioners are entitled to anticipatory bail. It is pertinent to note that the FIR was registered on 29.12.2009 and no progress has been made in the investigation by the investigating agency and it has not been able to even arrest the petitioners/accused; as if it was waiting for the petitioners to approach the Court for anticipatory bail. This attitude of the investigating agency must be deprecated. The petition is allowed. In case of arrest of the petitioners in the aforesaid FIR, they shall be released on interim bail to the satisfaction of the arresting officer, subject to the following conditions:- (i) They shall join the investigation as and when required by the Investigating Officer; (ii) they shall not offer any any threat, promise, or inducement to any person acquainted with the facts of Crl. Misc. No. M- 1785 of 2010 3 the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing the same to the Investigating Officer/Court; and (iii) they shall not leave the limits of this country without prior permission of the Court. February 11, 2010 (GURDEV SINGH ) prem JUDGE