JUDGMENT Mr. Ram Chand Gupta, J.: (Oral) - The present petition has been filed for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure in FIR no. 279 dated 08.12.2009, under Sections 406/407/409/420/465/467/468/471/477/120B IPC, registered at police station Sadar Ferozepur (now police station Kulgarhi), District Ferozepur. 2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record including the impugned order passed by learned Sessions Judge, Ferozepur dismissing anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of the petitioner. 3. This Court while issuing notice of motion on 25.02.2012 passed the following order:- “Crl.M.No.9861 of 2012 Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Crl.M.No.M-4631 of 2012 Contends that petitioner is not concerned with M/s Noor Rice Mills, to which paddy was allegedly entrusted by the Department of respondent-Government, which was allegedly misappropriated. Further contends that petitioner is brother of owner of adjoining rice mill, i.e., Punjab Rice and General Mills, and that he is also not having any concern with the said rice mill as well. Further contends that investigation of the case was allegedly completed, and challan was filed against owner of M/s Noor Rice Mills, who is already facing trial. Notice of motion to Advocate General, Punjab, for 19.3.2012. However, in the meantime, petitioner is directed to join the investigation and in case he is arrested, he shall be released on interim bail by the Arresting Officer to his satisfaction subject to compliance of conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.” 4. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has already joined the investigation pursuant to said order dated 25.02.2012. 5. The facts as noticed in order dated 25.02.2012 has not been disputed by learned counsel for the State, on instruction from ASI Kuldeep Singh. However, bail application is opposed on the ground that some of the embezzled paddy is yet to be recovered. 6. However, investigation has already been completed against owner of M/z Noor Rice Mills to whom paddy was entrusted by complainant and challan filed. Petitioner was only a silent partner of adjoining Rice Mill i.e. the Punjab Rice and General Mills, which was being run by his brother. 7. There are no allegations on behalf of the State that petitioner is likely to abscond or that he is likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts in the Court, if released on bail. 8. 7. There are no allegations on behalf of the State that petitioner is likely to abscond or that he is likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts in the Court, if released on bail. 8. Hence, in view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of Kirpal Singh is accepted and order dated 25.02.2012 granting interim bail in favour of the petitioner is, hereby, made absolute subject to compliance of conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. 9. The present petition stands disposed of accordingly. ---------0.B.S.0------------