IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 1) Crl.Misc.No.M-11765 of 2009 (O&M) Pawan Kumar @ Sipa ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent 2) Crl.Misc.No.M-12230 of 2009 (O&M) Rulda Mehra ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent 3) Crl.Misc.No.M-12260 of 2009 (O&M) Narinder Singh ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent Date of decision : 16.9.2009 CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER .... Present: Mr.K.S.Hissowal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr.B.B.S.Teji, AAG, Punjab. ..... Crl.Misc.No.M-11765 of 2009 (O&M) -2- MAHESH GROVER, J. These are petitions under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying for release of the petitioners in terms thereof in a case registered vide FIR No.32 dated 12.4.2009 under Sections 452, 380, 427, 323, 506, 34 IPC, at Police Station Sudhar, Distt. Ludhiana. The petitioners are said to have been embroiled in the commission of aforesaid offences. On 8.5.2009 this Court had granted the interim protection to the petitioners subject to the condition that they comply with the provisions of Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. On 31.7.2009 learned counsel for the State pointed out that the petitioners have not got the recovery of weapon effected. In this view of the matter this Court had granted last opportunity to the petitioners to join the investigation to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer. They were directed to appear before the Investigating officer on 4.8.2009 at 10.00 a.m. and the matter was adjourned to today. Today when the matter was taken up learned counsel for the State on instructions from SI Bhagat Ram pointed out that the petitioners have not joined the investigation as directed by this Court vide order dated 31.7.2009. Learned counsel for the petitioners has not been able to show any material from where it can be inferred that they have joined the investigation. The concession of anticipatory bail is to be afforded to a person who is ready to comply with the provisions of Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and join the investigation as and when called upon to do so. Since the petitioners have failed to join the Crl.Misc.No.M-11765 of 2009 (O&M) -3- investigation to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer, there is no reason to grant them the concession of pre-arrest bail. Accordingly, the petitions are dismissed. 16.9.2009 (MAHESH GROVER) JUDGE dss