Dara Chand Vs State of Haryana

High Court Of Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh 28 Jun 2011 CRM M-No. 19219 of 2011 (O and M) (2011) 06 P&H CK 0046
Bench: Single Bench
Result Published
Acts Referenced

Judgement Snapshot

Case Number

CRM M-No. 19219 of 2011 (O and M)

Hon'ble Bench

Alok Singh, J

Final Decision

Dismissed

Acts Referred
  • Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Section 120B, 420, 465, 467, 468

Judgement Text

Translate:

Alok Singh, J.@mdashThis is the second application seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No. 308 dated 9.5.2011, under Sections 420/465/467/468/471/120B of Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station City, District Sirsa.

2. First application seeking anticipatory bail being CRM No. M-18362 of 2011 was taken up for hearing on 7.6.2011. On 7.6.2011 Mr. Aman Bansal, learned Counsel for the Petitioner stated that the Petitioner would surrender/appear before the competent Magistrate on or before 25.6.2011 and shall move regular bail application, therefore, he may be permitted to withdrawn this petition.

3. On the statement made by Mr. Aman Bansal, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, first anticipatory bail application was permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to appear before the competent Magistrate on or before 25.6.2011 and to seek regular bail there from.

4. Present second anticipatory bail application is moved by different counsel Mr. Hitesh Verma.

5. Mr. Hitesh Verma, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, has argued that earlier bail application was withdrawn by Mr. Aman Bansal, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, without any instruction from the Petitioner.

6. Since first anticipatory bail application was withdrawn with liberty to surrender/appear before the competent Magistrate and to seek regular bail there from, second pre arrest bail application is not maintainable. Argument that earlier bail application was withdrawn by the then counsel without any instruction from the Petitioner seems to be after thought. Moreover, Petitioner in paragraph No. 2 of this petition has asserted as under:

Thereafter, the Petitioner approached this Hon''ble Court for grant of Anticipatory Bail vide CRM-M No. 18362 of 2011 which was listed before this Hon''ble Court on 7th June 2011. But due to some inadvertent mistake/miscommunication between the Petitioner and his counsel, the same was withdrawn by the counsel of the Petitioner on the ground that Petitioner is ready to surrender.

7. However, if Petitioner surrenders/appears before the Magistrate within ten days from today and seeks regular bail, same shall be decided without any undue delay. Present petition stands dismissed accordingly.

From The Blog
ITAT Ahmedabad Rules: Calculation Error in Section 54F Exemption Not Tax Misreporting
Nov
29
2025

Court News

ITAT Ahmedabad Rules: Calculation Error in Section 54F Exemption Not Tax Misreporting
Read More
Delhi High Court Refuses to De-Freeze Bank Account, Cites Concealment in ₹19.39 Crore GST ITC Fraud Probe
Nov
29
2025

Court News

Delhi High Court Refuses to De-Freeze Bank Account, Cites Concealment in ₹19.39 Crore GST ITC Fraud Probe
Read More