IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. -M No. 31760 of 2008 (O&M) Date of decision : January 09, 2009 Balbir Singh ....Petitioner versus State of Punjab ....Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pritam Pal Present : Mr. Deepak Nayyar, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. KD Sachdeva, DAG Punjab Pritam Pal,J. (Oral) Petitioner has brought this petition under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for seeking anticipatory bail in case FIR No.237 dated 30.10.2008 under sections 380, 457, 178, 198 IPC registered at Police Station B Division Amritsar. The allegations against him are that in the absence of Manjit Singh who is owner of property, the petitioner has forcibly taken over the possession after removing his (Manjit Singh's) articles and material lying therein. Manjit Singh is stated to be NRI. FIR in this case was, thus, lodged by his brother-in-law Satnam Singh. A perusal of the file shows that on 12.12.2008, the earlier counsel for the petitioner had stated before this Court that in case two weeks time is granted, the petitioner would remove his possession over the property of Manjit Singh. On this undertaking, the arrest of the petitioner was stayed. Today, Mr. Deepak Nayyar, Advocate has appeared on behalf of the petitioner. His first contention is that the earlier order dated 12.12.2008 be modified as the earlier counsel was not authorized to make the aforesaid statement before this Court and his second contention is that the civil litigation is going on between the parties so no criminal case is made out. Criminal Misc. -M No. 31760 of 2008 (O&M) -2- I have given my thoughtful consideration to the aforesaid arguments raised on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioner and find from the material placed on the file that Manjit Singh is a Non Resident Indian and as per allegations in the FIR, the petitioner in his absence had ransacked the house of Manjit Singh and ultimately also put his lock on the former's property. In this way he has taken the law into his hands. In the given facts and circumstances and without commenting on the merits of the case, I do not find it to be a fit case for granting anticipatory bail. Provisions under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure are to be invoked sparingly and in exceptional circumstances which are lacking in this case. Hence the present petition is dismissed. ( Pritam Pal ) January 09, 2009 Judge 'dalbir'