This judgment dismisses a petition for anticipatory bail filed under Sections 438 and 482 Cr.P.C. The court held that the petitioner, who had fled bail and failed to appear in a pending trial without surrendering first, was not entitled to the relief.
Petition for anticipatory bail dismissed; bail cancellation order implicitly upheld by dismissal.
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.
-1-
Crl.M.No.M-33705 of 2012(O&M)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
Crl.M.No.M-33705 of 2012(O&M) Date of Decision: October 30, 2012
Krishan Singh @ Kala @ Guru
.....Petitioner
v.
State of U.T.Chandigarh
.....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA
Present: Mr.R.K.Vashishat, Advocate for the petitioner.
.....
RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral)
Crl.M.No.64326 of 2012
Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions.
Crl.M.No.M-33705 of 2012
The present petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.308, dated 2.11.2010, under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, registered at Police Station Manimajra, Chandigarh.
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, vide which bail granted to the petitioner was cancelled.
Briefly stated, petitioner was facing trial in the aforementioned case and was on bail. However he jumped bail and did not come present before learned trial court on 30.8.2012, when PW6 Sub Inspector Gian Singh was present, whose cross-examination was deferred at the request of counsel for the accused and the witness had to be discharged. However, instead of surrendering before learned trial Court and explaining reasons for his absence, petitioner has filed the present petition for anticipatory bail.
-2-
Crl.M.No.M-33705 of 2012(O&M)
Hence, in view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition filed by petitionerKrishan Singh @ Kala @ Guru for grant of anticipatory bail is having no merit and the same is hereby dismissed.
30.10.2012
meenu
(Ram Chand Gupta) Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail after fleeing bail and failing to surrender prior to a pending trial.
Whether the petition filed for anticipatory bail in these specific circumstances has any merit.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Krishan Singh
State of U.T.Chandigarh
Ram Chand Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
