The Punjab and Haryana Excessive Court docket has reiterated that submitting of successive functions for anticipatory bail by an individual apprehending arrest, with out substantial change in circumstances, quantities to an abuse of means of Court docket.

Dismissing one such utility, Justice Vikas Bahl imposed Rs.50,000/- value, payable to District Authorized Companies Authority inside a month.

The Petitioner on this case is accused of forging paperwork to get the good thing about revised pay scale. His plea for anticipatory bail was beforehand rejected by the Further Classes Choose. Subsequently, a second anticipatory bail utility was filed, which got here to be withdrawn when the Court docket expressed its disinclination to grant aid. The current plea was filed one month thereafter.

No subsequent occasion or change in circumstance, a lot much less, substantial change in circumstance has been identified by realized counsel for the petitioner or averred within the current petition,” the Court docket noticed on the outset.

Reference was made to G.R. Ananda Babu v. State of Tamil Nadu & Anr., the place the Supreme Court docket held that specious cause of change in circumstances can’t be invoked for successive anticipatory bail functions, as soon as it’s rejected by a talking order.

Whereas contemplating the case on deserves, the courtroom noticed that the petitioner has taken the good thing about a revised pay scale from the division by submitting cast doc and prima facie has dedicated the offences talked about within the FIR. Subsequently, he doesn’t deserve the concession of anticipatory bail.

The petitioner thus, by submitting cast paperwork had obtained advantages of a revised pay scale from the division and prima facie has dedicated the offences talked about within the FIR and doesn’t deserve the concession of anticipatory bail.

Furthermore, the courtroom held that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required for recovering the unique mark sheets and to determine involvement of different individuals within the fee of the moment offence. Subsequently, the current petition deserves to be dismissed even on deserves.

Accordingly, the second petition was dismissed with prices.

Case Title: Ashok Kumar Versus State of Haryana

Click on Right here To Learn/Obtain Order



Supply hyperlink