Crl.M.No.M-16821 of 2009 -1- IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH Crl.M.No.M-16821 of 2009 Date of Decision: 13.7.2009 Sunita ..Petitioner. Vs. Sumer Singh and another ..Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present : Mr.K.K.Aggarwal, Sr.Advocate with Mr.R.K.Agnihotri, Advocate for the petitioner. None for respondent No.1. Mr.Partap Singh, Sr.DAG Haryana for the respondent No.2. RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. ( Oral) As per office report, no one has put in appearance on behalf of respondent No.1. Counsel for the petitioner submits that vide Annexure P4/T, the petitioner has deposited the employment allowance which she was alleged to have been obtained by way of misrepresentation. The petitioner was summoned in this case but since she could not appear before trial Court, therefore, vide order dated 8.6.2009 her presence has been secured through non bailable warrants. Counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner had applied for anticipatory bail in the complaint itself vide bail application No.89 of 2009 which was disposed of by the Additional Sessions Judge, Narnaul on 15.6.2009 with a Crl.M.No.M-16821 of 2009 -2- direction to the petitioner to surrender before the lower Court and to apply for regular bail. It was further ordered that if the bail application is filed by the petitioner, the same should be decided on the day when she surrenders. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner could not surrender before the Court below in pursuance of the order dated 15.6.2009 because it is the same Court which had passed the order on 8.6.2009 securing the presence of the petitioner through non bailable warrants. The trial Court (Court of CJM, Narnaul) is directed to release the petitioner on bail on furnishing bail bonds to its satisfaction on her appearance before the Court pursuant to the order dated 8.6.2009. The petition is disposed of. (Rakesh Kumar Jain) 13.7.2009 Judge Meenu