Buta Singh and Another vs State of Punjab

Alok Singh, J.—Affidavit of SI Ved Parkash handed over in the Court today is taken on record.

This is an application seeking anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 52 dated 2.5.2008 under Sections 379/420/465/467/468/471/511/120-B of the Indian Penal Code, Police Station Sadar Moga, District Moga.

Learned Counsel for the Petitioners states that the only allegation against the Petitioners is that they have forged agreement to sell to grab the property of the complainant. Learned Counsel has further stated that three different Superintendents of Police have conducted their independent enquiries and found the complaint baseless.

From the perusal of the affidavit it seems to be a case of civil nature, which has been wrongly given the colour of criminal offence. Even otherwise, custodial interrogation seems to be unjustified.

Hon''ble Apex Court in the matter of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra and Ors. 2011 (1) RCR (Cri) 126, has observed that irrational and indiscriminate arrest must be avoided.

Learned Counsel for the Petitioners states that Petitioners shall join the investigation as and when they are required to do so by the Investigating Officer.

Considering total facts and circumstances of the case present petition is allowed. Petitioners are directed to report to the police station within 10 days to join the investigation. On their joining the investigation, Petitioners shall be released on bail by the Investigating Officer/Arresting Officer on furnishing personal bond and one surety of Rs. 20,000/- each subject to the following conditions u/s 438 (2) of the Code:

i) that he shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

ii) that he shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

iii) that he shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.

Petitioner shall join investigation as and when he is required to do so. However, it is clarified that if Petitioners do not join the investigation despite of the call by the investigating officer, prosecution shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of the bail.