Anil Kapoor v. State Of Punjab And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-2529 of 2015 Date of Decision: 27.3.2015 Anil Kapoor .....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and another .....Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK

Present:

Mr. Pritam Saini, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. K.D.Sachdeva, Additional A.G. Punjab.

Mr. Sanjay Tangri, Advocate for respondent No.2.

*** RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK J.(ORAL) Applicant seeks pre-arrest bail in complaint case No. 733/2/09 dated 15.6.2009/30.7.2009 under Sections 6, 14 (1-A), 14-A

(1) of the Employees Provident Fund and Misc. Provisions Act, 1952 read with para 30,38 and 76 (D) of the Employees Provident Fund Scheme, 1952.

Notice of motion was issued.

Learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance on order dated 12.2.2015 passed by this Court in CRM-M-1251 of 2015, to contend, that present one is an identical petition. He further submits that since the fact situation of both the cases are identical, petitioner is entitled for similar treatment. AMIT KUMAR 2015.03.27 18:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

Criminal Misc. No. M-2529 of 2015 Faced with the above, learned counsel for the complainant-respondent No.2 fairly states that let an appropriate order by passed in terms of the abovesaid order dated 12.2.2015, directing the petitioner to appear before the learned trial court within a fixed period.

In view of the above, present petition is allowed. Petitioner is directed to appear before the learned trial court within a period of two weeks from today and furnish adequate bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned trial court. On doing so, petitioner shall be admitted to bail by the learned trial court during the pendency of trial.

Disposed of, accordingly.

(RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK) JUDGE 27.3.2015 AK Sharma AMIT KUMAR 2015.03.27 18:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document