CRM No. M-23060 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CRM No. M-23060 of 2009 Date of decision: 26.8.2009 Rashpal Singh and another ...Petitioners Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. Veneet Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioners. Rajan Gupta, J. This is a petition seeking anticipatory bail in a case registered against the petitioners under Sections 222, 223, 224, 225, 120-B IPC vide FIR No. 274 dated 10.07.2009 at police station Civil Lines, Amritsar. The allegations in the FIR are that one Chetan Bhalla @ Honey undertrial accused in a case under Section 302 IPC escaped from the judicial custody in connivance with the police officials. Resultantly, the instant FIR was registered on the statement of SI Tarsem Lal. Learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that duty of the petitioners was not with undertrial at the relevant time when he allegedly escaped. Thus, petitioners cannot be held liable for the same. This fact can be verified from the jail records. Learned counsel has also argued that the petitioners being the government servants, there is no chance of their fleeing from the justice. Thus, they deserve to be granted CRM No. M-23060 of 2009 2 the concession of anticipatory bail. I have heard counsel for the petitioners. A perusal of the allegations levelled in the FIR show that same are serious in nature. The undertrial accused of an offence under Section 302 IPC escaped while in judicial custody. This allegedly happened due to connivance of police officials. I am, thus, of the considered view that petitioners are not entitled to concession of anticipatory bail keeping in view the nature of crime. In fact custodial interrogation of the petitioners may be required to enable the investigating agency to unravel the entire conspiracy. I thus, find no merit in the petition. The same is hereby dismissed. (RAJAN GUPTA) JUDGE August 26, 2009 'rajpal'