MAHINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Bail petitioners, named herein above, have approached this Court in the instant proceedings filed under Sec. 438 Cr.PC, seeking therein pre-arrest bail in connection with case FIR No. 9/16 dated 3.4.2016, registered at Police Station State CID Bharari, District Shimla, H.P., under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B of the IPC, Sec. 13 (I) (D) (II) of Prevention of Corruption Act and Sections 5 and 7 of HP Prevention of Specific Corrupt Practices Act.

(2.) Sequel to orders dated 20.11.2018 and 4.12.2018, Mr. Sandeep Dhawal, S.P. (Cyber) CID and Mr. Rajiv, S.P. CID/Crime, Shimla, H.P., have come present with the record. Mr. Dinesh Thakur, learned Additional Advocate General, states that he does not intend to file fresh status report because detailed status report indicating therein involvement of bail petitioners in the crime alleged to have been committed by them, stands duly reflected in the status report filed on the previous date, which is already on record.

(3.) Learned Additional Advocate General, on instructions from Investigating Officer, who is present in Court, fairly stated that pursuant to orders dated 20.11.2018 and 4.12.2018, all the bail petitioners have joined the investigation and they are fully cooperating. He, under instructions, also stated that during the investigation, it has emerged that all the bail petitioners are involved in theft of the material from the company under liquidation. He further contended that investigation qua all the bail petitioners is almost complete and nothing is required to be recovered from them, but while enlarging them on bail, they may be directed to make themselves available as and when required by the Investigating Agency.