Jahid v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-30268-2021 Date of decision: 14.12.2021 Jahid

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana .....Respondent



   





   for the petitioner.

    

****    

       Case is taken up for hearing through video conferencing. Through this petition, the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case bearing

  !"

!# $! %    "& %'$( % )   *  +  $! "    ", #!

)
  ) -.  +.  ,#!   $%, //# /!% $!0
-    $"

)  +  ,", ' .

(  
.     1 

2   !$ !3 $!$ 4 5  -   4  6 
 4 5. and directed to join investigation.

Learned State counsel submits that despite availing of two opportunities, the petitioner has not joined investigation and, thus, has PARVEEN KUMAR 2021.12.15 02:29 I attest to the accuracy of this order.

CRM-M-30268-2021 /2/ failed to comply with the directions contained in the order dated 02.08.2021. Learned State counsel also submits that there are as many as four other cases registered or pending against the petitioner and he stands declared a proclaimed offender in one case.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. The present FIR was registered way back in 2017. The petitioner has approached the Court for pre-arrest bail after a period of four years. Moreover, in spite of the directions contained in the order dated 02.08.2021, the petitioner has not joined investigation. Above all, the petitioner has since been declared proclaimed offender in FIR No.34/2017.

Keeping in view the antecedents of the petitioner and his evasive conduct for the last four years, this Court finds that the petitioner no longer deserves the concession of anticipatory bail. Therefore, finding no merit in the present petition, the same is dismissed.

14.12.2021    

 4 *+   7  &4*8 9&

7 4 5.8 9&

    PARVEEN KUMAR 2021.12.15 02:29 I attest to the accuracy of this order.