- (1.) This Court, on February 23, 2012, had passed the following order: The present petition has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 204 dated 26.11.2011 registered at Police Station Raikot, District Ludhiana Rural, under Sections 420 and 120-B IPC. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Dalip Singh son of Prem Singh had an electricity connection in his name. Dalip Singh, according to learned counsel for the petitioner, had earlier sold land to the petitioner. Learned counsel submits that Dalip Singh, in the FIR, has stated that Avtar Singh son of the petitioner had forged his affidavit and got the electricity connection transferred in his name. He further submits that in the FIR itself it is stated that the electricity connection was re-transferred in the name of Dalip Singh. He further submits that mere fact that son of the petitioner had allegedly forged the affidavit of Dalip Singh will not fasten the petitioner with any criminal liability i.e. with the aid of Section 120-B IPC. He further submits that the case was registered after the period of two years. Further submits that the alleged affidavit, which was submitted to the Electricity Department is already in possession of the Investigating Agency and the offence, if any is based on documents, hence, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not called for. Issue notice of motion to the Advocate General, Punjab, for 12.3.2012. Meanwhile, in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be admitted to interim bail on his furnishing personal and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner shall, however join the investigation as and when called for and he will also abide by the conditions as specified under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C. Counsel for the State, on instructions from Jagroop Singh ASI, Police Station Raikot, District Ludhiana, states that the petitioner has joined the investigation and is no longer required for custodial interrogation by the investigating agency.
(2.) For the reasons stated in order dated February 23, 2012 and in view of the statement made by Counsel for the State, the present petition is accepted. The interim pre-arrest bail granted to the petitioner vide order dated February 23, 2012 is made absolute and it is ordered that in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail to the satisfaction of the arresting/investigating officer. However, he shall continue to appear before the investigating agency as and when calledfor till filing of a report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. He shall also abide by the conditions specified under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C. On submission of the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C., the petitioner shall be permitted to furnish regular bail bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court.;