Ravinder Singh @ Sonu v. State Of Punjab

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ......

Criminal Misc. No.M-2475 of 2017 .....

Date of decision:27.1.2017 Ravinder Singh alias Sonu

...Petitioner

v.

State of Punjab

...Respondent

....

Coram:

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Inderjit Singh .....

Present:

Mr. Rajesh Kapila, Advocate for the petitioner. .....

Inderjit Singh, J.

The petitioner has filed this second petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.19 dated 22.2.2016 registered for the offences under Sections 457 and 380 IPC at Police Station Gate Hakim, District Amritsar.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the record.

The order dated 9.11.2016 passed in earlier petition i.e. Criminal Misc. No.M-33901 of 2016 by this Court shows that after arguing for some time when the Court was not inclined to give the benefit of anticipatory bail, learned counsel for the petitioner prayed that he may be allowed to withdraw that petition and the same was dismissed as withdrawn. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not pointed out any changed circumstances when the first bail petition was withdrawn. Harpal Singh Parmar 2017.01.31 10:43 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Cr. Misc. No.M-2475 of 2017 [2] I have gone through the record also in this case. The petitioner is required for custodial interrogation. The buffaloes are still to be recovered.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find it a fit case where the present petitioner is entitled to the benefit of anticipatory bail.

Therefore, finding no merit in this petition, the same is dismissed.

January 27, 2017.

(Inderjit Singh) Judge *hsp* NOTE:

Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes Whether reportable:

No Harpal Singh Parmar 2017.01.31 10:43 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh