This judgment dismisses a second petition for anticipatory bail filed by Jasbir Singh, who had previously been declared a proclaimed offender. The court held that since there were no changed circumstances and the petitioner continued to abscond, extraordinary relief was not warranted.
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-25957 of 2012(O&M)
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
Crl.M.No.M-25957 of 2012(O&M) Date of Decision: August 29, 2012
Jasbir Singh
.....Petitioner
v.
State of Punjab
.....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA
Present: Mr.H.S.Thiara Advocate for the petitioner.
.....
RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral)
Crl.M.No.50041 of 2012
Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions.
Crl.M.No.M-25957 of 2012
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 22.9.2004, under Sections 406, 420 IPC, registered at Police Station Division No.2, Jalandhar, District Jalandhar.
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, Jalandhar, vide which application filed on behalf of the present petitioner for anticipatory bail was dismissed.
Briefly stated, petitioner is an accused in the aforementioned FIR, which is dated 22.9.2004. He had been absconding. He did not appear despite issuance of non-bailable warrants. He was declared proclaimed offender on 16.4.2005. His earlier bail application for anticipatory bail was
Crl.M.No.M-25957 of 2012(O&M) -2- got dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 23.1.2012 passed in Crl.M.No.M-1124 of 2012, after arguing by learned counsel for the petitioner. Thereafter petitioner filed another petition before leaned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalandhar, for the same relief, which was also dismissed. He has filed the present petition for anticipatory bail again. His earlier bail application was dismissed by this Court on 23.1.2012. Since then he is absconding. There is no change in the circumstances of the case since the dismissal of earlier application of anticipatory bail. Hence, in view of these facts, it is not such a case in which extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner-accused.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present second petition filed by petitioner-Jasbir Singh for grant of anticipatory bail is, hereby, dismissed being devoid of any merit.
29.8.2012
meenu
(Ram Chand Gupta) Judge
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to a petitioner who had been declared a proclaimed offender and absconded after earlier bail applications were dismissed.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Jasbir Singh
State of Punjab
Ram Chand Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
