AMAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MR . Jaivir Yadav, counsel for the petitioner has drawn my attention to the agreement -copy annexure P/1 wherein sale an made by the father of the petitioner in favour of Kirpa Ram. The huts were constructed on the leased premises by the lessee and his labourers are residing therein and they are alleged to have used the electric energy in violation of the rules and were caught red -handed during checking.

(2.) ANNEXURE P/2 is the report of Junior Engineer which indicates that the premises of Amar Singh were checked and electricity was found to be used by the engaged 7 -8 contractors. Considering the totality of facts and circumstances, the petitioner -Amar Singh deserves anticipatory bail and anticipatory bail is granted to him on the following terms and conditions :

(3.) DURING the period of anticipatory bail, the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence of the prosecution.