Crl. Misc. No. M – 12966 of 2010(O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -.- Crl. Misc. No. M – 12966 of 2010(O&M) Date of decision:- 26.8.2010 Baldeep Singh & Ors. ... Petitioners Versus State of Punjab & Anr. ... Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH Present:- Mr. Aman Bansal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. A.S.Brar, Sr. DAG, Punjab. Gurdev Singh, J (oral) This petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by Baldeep Singh, Nacchatar Singh and Sikander Singh, for the grant of anticipatory bail in FIR No. 41 dated 10.4.2010, registered under Sections 307, 323, 506 and 34 IPC, in Police Station Sadar Dhuri. Petitioners were allowed interim anticipatory bail vide order dated 5.5.2010. It has been submitted by learned State counsel that Baldeep Singh and Nacchatar Singh – petitioners No. 1 and 2 have joined the investigation and are no more require for further investigation. Therefore, the order granting interim anticipatory bail to these petitioners is made absolute subject to the conditions incorporated therein. This order shall remain in operation till the decision of the application for regular bail, which is to be filed by the petitioners No. 1 and 2 at the time of presentation of the challan against them before the trial Court. Crl. Misc. No. M – 12966 of 2010(O&M) -2- In respect of petitioner No.3 – Sikandar Singh, it has been submitted by learned State counsel that he did not join the investigation in spite of issuance of notices under Section 160 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. On 29.6.2010, it was stated by learned State counsel that in spite of written notice, the petitioners did not come to join the investigation. Thereafter, all the petitioners were directed to join investigation on 13.7.2010. In spite of the directions and notices issued to petitioner No.3, he has not joined the investigation and has violated one of the conditions imposed upon him while granting the interim anticipatory bail that he will make himself available for interrogation as and when required by the investigating officer. In these circumstances, he is not entitled to the benefit of anticipatory bail and the anticipatory bail application qua him is hereby dismissed. The petition is disposed of accordingly. August 26, 2010 (Gurdev Singh) tripti Judge