CRM-M No. 29264 of 2011 **** Raj Kumar Goyal and another v. State of Punjab Present: Mr. T.S.Sangha, Sr. Advocate with Mr. H.S. Sangha, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. S.S.Gill, DAG, Punjab. **** This is a petition for anticipatory bail filed in case bearing FIR No. 54 dated 18.08.2011, under Sections 406, 420 IPC registered at Police Station Mullanpur Garibdass, Distt. S.A.S. Nagar. On 26.09.2011 the following contentions were noticed:- “Learned Senior Counsel has argued that in respect of the same occurrence the petitioner had lodged FIR No. 503 dated 02.11.2007 in Police Station Sector 34, Chandgiarh, challan was presented after investigation and the petitioner was named as a witness. However, now the Assistant Registrar, Kharar has lodged another FIR No. 54 dated 18.08.2011 in respect of the same occurrence where the petitioner has been made a co- accused along with the main accused Sandeep Singh Sabharwal. As per learned counsel there is no bar in a challan being presented against any other person who may have been found guilty during investigation but a separate FIR could not have been lodged. Relies upon T.T.Antony v. State of Kerala, reported as 2001 SCC(Crl.) 1048 in this regard.” Thereafter on 04.10.2011 the investigating officer of the present FIR had stated that he had no knowledge about FIR No. 503 dated 02.11.2007 and in those circumstances the petitioners were directed to appear before him with the complete detail of the said FIR. Today learned DAG, on instructions from ASI Mohan Singh, has accepted the fact that in respect of the same incident FIR No. 503 aforementioned had been CRM-M No. 29264 of 2011 -2- lodged. In these circumstances I find no reason to deny the concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. In case they are arrested, they shall be released on bail by the investigating officer to his satisfaction subject to the conditions envisaged under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. Petition stands disposed of. ( AJAY TEWARI ) JUDGE November 23, 2011 sunita