Crl.M. No. M- 569 of 2011 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.M. No. M- 569 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision : 9.2.2011 ... Kanwar Singh and others ................Petitioners vs. State of Haryana .................Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.C. Puri Present: Sh. S.K. Yadav, Advocate for the petitioners Sh. Amandeep Singh, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana. ... K.C. Puri, J. So, far as Pankaj - petitioner No.3 is concerned, counsel for the petitioners has submitted that he has been arrested and allowed the concession of regular bail by the trial Court. So, the petition qua Pankaj – petitioner No.3, stands dismissed as having become infructuous. As per allegation of the prosecution, Kanwar Singh and Sansar Singh – petitioners No. 1 and 2, alongwith Pankaj – petitioner No.3 have set the liquor vend on fire as the salesman refused to give liquor to them on credit. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the Crl.M. No. M- 569 of 2011 -2- matter has been compromised and on that account petitioners No. 1 and 2 are entitled to the concession of anticipatory bail. I have considered the said submission. The offence complained of is punishable with life imprisonment. In case anticipatory bail is granted to them, wrong signal shall go to the society that they have gone un-punished. So, no ground for grant of anticipatory bail is made out. Consequently, the petition qua petitioners No. 1 and 2, stands dismissed. ( K.C. Puri ) 9.2.2011 Judge chugh