JUDGMENT

Anoop Chitkara, J.

1. The petitioner apprehending arrest in the FIR captioned above has come up before this Court under Section 438 CrPC seeking anticipatory bail.

2. In paragraph 26 of the bail petition, the accused declares that he has no criminal antecedents.

3. The petitioner allegedly verified the identity and address of the main accused, who were trying to obtain passports on fake identity and fictitious addresses.

4. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner contends that the custodial investigation would serve no purpose whatsoever, and the pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and family.

5. Ld. counsel representing the State opposes bail.

REASONING:

6. The petitioner's case is that he was befooled by the main accused and he had no personal advantage by such wrong identification. The stand appears to be probable and furthermore, the petitioner is a first offender, and one of the relevant factors would be to provide an opportunity to course-correct. Even a primafacie perusal of paragraphs4& 5 of the bail petitio