IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc.-M No. 11968 of 2011(O&M) Date of Decision: 09.09.2011 Ajaib Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ..Respondent CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. Jagraj Singh Khiva, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. P.S. Bajwa, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. …… RAJESH BINDAL, J. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is not involved in the crime and only his car was used without his consent. The son of the petitioner is one of the accused. Learned State counsel pointed out that son of the petitioner is involved in 13 other FIRs registered against him. In the present case, recov- ery is of 530 grams of intoxicating powder, which was found to be alpra- zolom salt in chemical examination. Considering the aforesaid facts, in my opinion, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of pre-arrest bail. Dismissed. (RAJESH BINDAL) JUDGE 09.09.2011 sharmila