CRM No.M-31087 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 17.11.2010 Jagir Singh and Kashmir Singh sons of Kaku Ram ...Petitioners Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR Present: Mr.G.S.Kaura, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr.Shilesh Gupta, D.A.G., Punjab. Mr.Vikas Gupta, Advocate for the complainant. M ehinder S ingh S ullar , J . (Oral) Invoking the provisions of section 438 Cr.PC, petitioners Jagir Singh and Kashmir Singh sons of Kaku Ram, have filed the instant petition for anticipatory bail in a case registered against them alongwith their other co-accused, vide FIR No.218 dated 9.9.2010 (Annexure P1), on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC by the police of Police Station City Tarn Taran 2. Notice of the petition was issued to the State. 3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, going through the record with their valuable help and after bestowal of thoughts over the entire matter, to my mind, the present petition deserves to be accepted in this regard. 4. It is not a matter of dispute that the petitioners have compromised the matter with the complainant. They have agreed to make the payment of the impugned amount in instalments, depicted in the compromise deed dated 17.11.2010. The learned counsel for the complainant has also acknowledged the factum of compromise between the parties. Once the parties have compromised the matter, then, to my mind, no useful purpose would be served in sending the petitioners in police custody in such a property dispute. Moreover, all the offences CRM No.M-31087 of 2010 2 alleged against the petitioners are triable by the Court of Magistrate. There is no history of their previous involvement in any criminal case. 5. So, taking into consideration the totality of the facts and circumstances, emanating from the record, as discussed here-in-above and without commenting further anything on merits, lest it may prejudice the case of either side during the course of the trial of the case, the present petitioners are entitled to anticipatory bail in the obtaining circumstances of the instant case. 6. Consequently, it is directed that in the event of their arrest, the petitioners shall be released on anticipatory bail on their furnishing bail and surety bonds in the sum of Rs.10,000/- each to the satisfaction of Arresting Officer, subject to the conditions that (i) they shall make themselves available for interrogation by the Investigating Agency as and when required; (ii) they shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer and (iii) they will not leave India without prior permission of the trial Court. 7. Needless to state that if the petitioners violate any terms and conditions of the compromise or do not cooperate/join the investigation, then the complainant/prosecution would be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of their bail, in this relevant connection. 17.11.2010 (Mehinder Singh Sullar) AS Judge