Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2006 DIGILAW 498 (PNJ)

Rohtan Singh v. State

2006-02-16

ADARSH KUMAR GOEL

body2006
Judgment 1. Heard. OFFENCE alleged is under section 409 IPC. 2. Counsel for the petitioner says that without prejudice to his rights and contentions, the petitioner will deposit the alleged deficit amount with the panchayat within two months from today, failing which the order of anticipatory bail will cease to operate and thus, arrest of the petitioner is not called for. It is further stated that if after adjudication, the amount is found not due, the petitioner will be entitled to refund. 3. Without expressing any final opinion on merits, the petitioner is granted anticipatory bail till conclusion of investigation or three months whichever is later during which the petitioner will be free to apply for regular bail to the concerned court in accordance with law. 4. In the event of arrest, the petitioner will be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the arresting officer within two weeks from today on the conditions that the petitioner will not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer; he will not interfere with the prosecution evidence directly or indirectly; he will not leave the country without the previous permission of the court; he will associate with the investigation as and when called by the police and that he will surrender the passport, if any. The petition is disposed of accordingly.