CRM No. M-8677 of 2011 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM No. M-8677 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 16.05.2011 Bachitter Singh ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present: - Ms. Gagandeep Grewal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. K.D. Sachdeva, Addl. A.G., Punjab. 1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? ***** ALOK SINGH, J (ORAL) This is an application seeking anticipatory bail in case FIR No.103 dated 2.3.2009 under Sections 406/420/120-B IPC, Police Station S.A.S. Nagar. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that in the petition FIR may be read as dated “2.3.2009” instead of “3.3.2009”. Allowed. The only allegation against the petitioner is that neither petitioner has returned the vehicle nor lease money has been paid. Mr. K.D. Sachdeva, learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab, on instructions from ASI Balraj Singh, who is personally present in Court, has fairly stated that cheques issued by the petitioner in discharge of his monthly instalment responsibility have already been dishonoured by the bank, therefore, appropriate action can be taken CRM No. M-8677 of 2011 (O&M) -2- against the petitioner by the complainant under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act. Mr. Sachdeva for his all fairness has submitted that petitioner should be permitted to join the investigation. He has further stated that custodial interrogation at this stage seems to be unjustified because this is a case of the breach of lease hold agreement. Considering totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, petition is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioner, he shall be released on bail by the Investigating Officer/Arresting Officer on furnishing personal bond and two surety bonds of Rs.20,000/- each subject to the following conditions: - i) that he shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; ii) that he 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; iii) that he shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court. It is made clear that in the event of violation of any of the conditions, prosecution shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of the bail. (Alok Singh) Judge May 16, 2011 R.S.