Dismissed

Kulwinder Singh v. Ut of Chandigarh

Punjab & Haryana HC3 Dec 2010CRM-M/35524/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner filed an anticipatory bail petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. regarding an Excise Act FIR. The Court dismissed the petition, holding that a person who jumps bail, absents himself despite warrants, and becomes a proclaimed offender is not entitled to such relief.

What did the court decide?

The petition filed for grant of anticipatory bail is dismissed being devoid of any merit.

Kulwinder Singh Vs Ut of Chandigarh — Anticipatory Bail | Punjab & Haryana HC (2010)

¶1

-1-

¶2

Crl.M.No.M-35524 of 2010 (O&M)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶4

Crl.M.No.M-35524 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: December 3, 2010

Kulwinder Singh

.....Petitioner

State of U.T., Chandigarh

¶9

.....Respondent

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA

¶11

Present: Mr.Tarunveer Vashisth, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

.....

¶13

RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral)

¶14

Crl.M.No.63103 of 2010

¶15

Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions.

¶16

Crl.M.No.M-35524 of 2010

¶17

The present petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.101, dated 28.5.2007, under Section 61 of Excise Act, registered at Police Station Sector 31, Chandigarh.

¶18

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the whole record carefully, including the impugned order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chandigarh, vide which application filed on behalf of the present petitioner for anticipatory bail was dismissed.

¶19

Brief facts are that petitioner-accused was released on bail vide order dated 7.3.2008. However, he jumped bail and did not appear before the Court on 29.10.2008. He continued absenting from the Court despite his warrants of arrest issued several time by the Court. He was declared proclaimed offender by learned trial Court vide order dated 30.4.2010 and after concluding of proceedings under Section 299 Cr.P.C., the file was also consigned to the record room by learned trial Court.

¶20

Hence, it is not such a case in which extraordinary relief of

¶21

-2-

¶22

Crl.M.No.M-35524 of 2010 (O&M)

¶23

anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner-accused.

¶24

In view of these facts, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition filed by petitioner-Kulwinder Singh for grant of anticipatory bail is, hereby, dismissed being devoid of any merit.

¶25

3.12.2010 meenu

¶26

(Ram Chand Gupta) Judge

Kulwinder Singh v. Ut of Chandigarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kulwinder Singh v. Ut of Chandigarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rano Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Kailash Grover and Anr. Vs State of Punjab

Jaspreet Singh Vs State of Punjab

Mander Singh Vs State of Punjab

Nisha Vs State of Punjab and Another

Satpal Singh Alias Mindo Vs State of Punjab