Crl. Misc. No. M-32692 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc. No. M-32692 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: 10.01.2011. S.C.Jain & another .......Petitioners Vs. State of Haryana .....Respondent CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Singh. 1. Whether the reporters of local news papers may be allowed to see judgment? 2. To be referred to reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? Present: Mr. Atul Lakhanpal, Sr. Advocate for the petitioners. Ms. Preeti Chaudhary, AAG, Haryana for the State. Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Advocate for the complainant. ..... Alok Singh, J. (Oral). This is the petition seeking anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 898 dated 5.10.2010 under sections 406/420/467/468/471/506/120-B IPC registered at P.S. City Karnal, Distt. Karnal. Mr. Atul Lakhanpal, Sr. Advocate has stated that in compliance of interim order passed by this Court dated 16.11.2010, the petitioners have appeared before the Investigating Officer and have furnished their bail bonds and Crl. Misc. No. M-32692 of 2010 -2- personal bonds to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer. It has further been stated by Mr. Atul Lakhanpal that the petitioners shall participate in the investigation as and when they are required to do so by the police. Learned Assistant Advocate General, Haryana on the instructions of Mr. Randhir Singh, ASI, who is present in person in the court, has stated that despite of issuing the notices under section 160 Cr.P.C., the petitioners are not appearing before the police for the investigation. A perusal of the case diary, which is handed over by Assistant Advocate General reveals that the petitioners have appeared before the Investigating Officer and their statements were also recorded. Case diary dated 14.12.2010 also suggests that if their presence shall be required in future for further investigation, necessary action shall be taken. On being asked ASI Randhir Singh has made statement before this Court that the petititioners never appeared in the police station and never participated in the investigation. However, case diary reveals that the petitioners in fact had appeared in the police station and participated in the investigation on 14.12.2010. The statement made by ASI is found to be false, misleading and incorrect. Let necessary disciplinary action be taken against ASI Randhir Singh by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Karnal for making incorrect statement before the Court and action taken against ASI be communicated to this Court. In view of the fact that the petitioners are participating in the investigation, the present petition is allowed. Crl. Misc. No. M-32692 of 2010 -3- Order dated 16.11.2010 is made absolute, subject to the limitations provided under Section 438(2) of the Code. The petitioners-accused shall participate in the investigation as and when they are required. However, it is clarified that if the petitioners do not cooporate with the investigating agency, then the Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to move proper application for the cancellation of the bail. (ALOK SINGH) JUDGE January 10, 2011 gurpreet