Mohammad Akbar v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-26576 of 2018 Date of decision: 02.08.2018 Mohammad Akbar ..Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ..Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY

Present:

Mr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner.

*** Daya Chaudhary, J. (Oral) This is the second petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.854 dated 20.12.2017 registered under Sections 3/13(1), 8/13(3) of the Haryana Gauvansh Sanrakshan and Gausamvardhan Act, 2015 at Police Station Nuh, District Mewat, Haryana.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the earlier petition filed by the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail was dismissed as withdrawn and the present petition has been filed on the ground that earlier petition was not dismissed on merits. Learned counsel has also relied upon judgment rendered by Hon'ble the Apex Court in Rani Dudeja vs. State of Haryana, 2017 Cri. L.R. 335 in support of his contentions wherein it has been stated that second petition is maintainable if the earlier petition has not been dismissed on merits.

On perusal of said judgment, it appears that the second petition is maintainable under changed circumstances but in the present petition, NEETU RANI 2018.08.06 11:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Criminal Misc. No. M-26576 of 2018 there is no change in circumstances.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has been asked to show as to what are the changed circumstances after withdrawal of the earlier petition but he was not able to show any change circumstance. Accordingly, the second petition cannot be entertained in absence of any change circumstance.

Dismissed.

02.08.2018 (DAYA CHAUDHARY) neetu JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether Reportable No NEETU RANI 2018.08.06 11:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh