CRM-M No. 29573 of 2011 **** Surinder Mehta and another v. Stste of Punjab Present: Mr. Surinder Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. S.S.Gill, DAG, Punjab. **** This is a petition for anticipatory bail filed in case bearing FIR No. 202 dated 27.08.2011, under Sections 323, 452, 506, 34 IPC registered at Police Station Rama Mandi, Jalandhar. On 28.09.2011 the following contention was noticed:- “ Learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that there is no explanation for the delay of almost one month in lodging of the complaint and the real reason is that the complainant and his daughter-in-law want to avoid making the payment of the washing machine purchased and have thus lodged this false FIR.” Learned DAG has very fairly stated that in view of the averments made it may be a case of false implication but the petitioner should join the investigation. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that he has no objection. In the circumstances this petition is allowed. Let the petitioners appear before the investigating officer on 15.10.2011 between 10.00 a.m. and 4.00 p.m. and on any other date on which their presence is required. The investigating officer, on their appearance, shall release them on bail to his satisfaction, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. ( AJAY TEWARI ) JUDGE October 05, 2011 sunita