Gaurav Gupta v. State Of Punjab

In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana At Chandigarh (I) CRM-M-17607-2024 (O&M) Gaurav Gupta ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ... Respondent (II) Sanjiv Kumar ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ... Respondent Date of Decision:-27.5.2024

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL Present:- Dr. Anmol Rattan Sidhu, Senior Advocate with Mr. Raghav Gulati, Advocate, for the petitioner in CRM-M-17607-2024.

Mr. Puran Singh Hundal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Gursahib Singh Hundal, Advocate and Mr. Vikramjeet Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner in CRM-M-19883-2024.

Mr. Deepinder Brar, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

***** FIR No.

Dated Police Station Section/s 12.10.2022 Vigilance Bureau, Flying Squad-I, Punjab at Mohali, District S.A.S. Nagar 13(1)(b) read with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 as amended by P.C. Amendment Act of 2018, wherein offences under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC were added later on

CRM-M-17607-2024 (O&M) & ( 2 ) GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J. (Oral) 1.

This order shall dispose of the above mentioned two petitions filed on behalf of petitioners Gaurav Gupta and Sanjiv Kumar seeking grant of anticipatory bail in respect of the aforementioned FIR.

2.

At the very outset, it needs to be mentioned that it is the second attempt on behalf of petitioner - Gaurav Gupta (in CRM-M-17607-2024) and third attempt on behalf of petitioner - Sanjiv Kumar (in CRM-M-19883-2024) seeking grant of anticipatory bail inasmuch as they had earlier also approached this Court by way of filing separate petitions i.e. CRM-M-133672023 filed on behalf of petitioner Gaurav Gupta and CRM-M-20517-2023 filed on behalf of petitioner Sanjiv Kumar, which were dismissed on merits by way of a detailed common order dated 2.6.2023 passed in CRM-M-175442023. 3.

It may here also be mentioned that petitioner Sanjiv Kumar, pursuant to dismissal of his first petition for grant of anticipatory bail, had even approached Hon'ble the Supreme Court by way of filing Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.7834/2023, which was, however, dismissed as withdrawn on 17.7.2023.

4.

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner(s), this Court does not find any substantial change in circumstances to justify indulgence in the second attempt on behalf of the petitioners seeking anticipatory bail under provisions of Section 438 Cr.P.C. Both the petitions, as such, are dismissed.

CRM-M-17607-2024 (O&M) & ( 3 ) 5.

A copy of this order be placed on the file of connected case. 27.5.2024 ( Gurvinder Singh Gill ) Pankaj Judge Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No