CRM No. M-2487 of 2011 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM No. M-2487 of 2011 Date of decision: 28.03.2011 Sat Pal Singh ....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present: - Mr. R.S. Chahal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Gaurav Dhir, DAG, Haryana. 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 Court on 28.2.2011 has passed the following order: - “Mr. Ramesh Kumar, Deputy Superintendent of Police (City), Fatehabad, has filed his affidavit stating therein that Harbhajan Singh son of Singara Singh has given loan of Rs.2 lacs to the petitioner on interest at the rate of 2% per month, 12 years ago which the petitioner- accused has failed to repay, hence, investigation is being conducted on the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Fatehabad, therefore, present petition seeking anticipatory bail be dismissed. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Fatehabad, shall file his comments as to how a criminal case is made out against the petitioner for not refunding the loan amount given to him 12 years ago for which suit for recovery has also become time barred. Registry shall forward this order to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Fatehabad. Deputy Superintendent of Police shall appear in person before this Court on the next date of hearing. List on 28.03.2011. Meanwhile, petitioner shall not be arrested pursuant to CRM No. M-2487 of 2011 -2- the case stated in the affidavit of deputy Superintendent of Police.” Mr. Gaurav Dhir, on the instructions of DSP Ramesh Kumar, who is personally present in the Court, states that police has submitted the report that no offence is made out. However, since Chief Judicial Magistrate has directed for the investigation of the case after registration of FIR, therefore, police was duty-bound to make compliance of the order of CJM. Learned CJM has submitted his report stating that he has nowhere observed that any prima facie case is made out against the petitioner for non-refunding the amount, which was paid 12 years before. This Court fails to understand under what circumstances, learned Magistrate has directed the police to register FIR and to investigate the matter if in the opinion of the Magistrate no offence is made out for non-refund of the amount after 12 years. Mr. Gaurav Dhir, DAG, Haryana, on the instructions of DSP Ramesh Kumar, states that petitioner shall not be arrested in the present case. He further states that even after registration of FIR on the directions of CJM no criminal case can be said to have been made out against the petitioner. Petition stands disposed of in the light of statement made by learned Deputy Advocate General, Haryana. (Alok Singh) Judge March 28, 2011 R.S.