The High Court dismissed the petition for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C., holding that an accused who has absented from court and jumped bail is not entitled to this extraordinary relief, without expressing an opinion on the merits of the case.
Petition for anticipatory bail dismissed as devoid of merit.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Crl.M.No.M-1726 of 2012(O&M)
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
Crl.M.No.M-1726 of 2012(O&M) Date of Decision: January 18, 2012
Avtar Singh
.....Petitioner
v.
State of Punjab
.....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA
Present: Mr.Surinder Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.
.....
RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral)
The present petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.78, dated 18.5.2006, under Sections 406, 420 IPC, registered at Police Station Division No.1, Jalandhar.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the whole record carefully, including the impugned order dated 20.10.2011 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalandhar, vide which application filed on behalf of the present petitioner for anticipatory bail was dismissed.
Briefly stated, petitioner is facing trial in case FIR No.78, dated 18.5.2006, under Sections 406, 420 IPC, registered at Police Station Division No.1, Jalandhar, before the Court of learned Magistrate. He was granted bail. However, he absented on 30.9.2011 and hence, his bail bonds were cancelled and his presence was secured by non-bailable warrants. It has been observed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalandhar, in the
Crl.M.No.M-1726 of 2012(O&M)
-2-
impugned order that earlier on 3.8.2011, co-accused Hardev Singh absented and an application for exemption was filed.
The only plea taken by petitioner-accused is that he could not appear as wrong date was noted by him. However, for that petitioner has to move appropriate application for regular bail and satisfy the trial Court. An accused, who absented from the Court and jumps bail is not entitled to extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail. Hence, it is not such a case in which extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioneraccused.
Hence, in view of these facts, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition filed by petitionerAvtar Singh for grant of anticipatory bail is, hereby, dismissed being devoid of any merit.
(Ram Chand Gupta) Judge
18.1.2012 meenu
3 issues framed by the court
Whether an accused who has absented from court and jumped bail is entitled to anticipatory bail.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail given his failure to appear.
Whether the petition for anticipatory bail is maintainable in view of the petitioner's prior absconding.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Avtar Singh
State of Punjab
RAM CHAND GUPTA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
