Crl. Misc. No. M-33332 of 2011 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc. No. M-33332 of 2011 Date of Decision: November 7, 2011 Gaurav Sharma …..Petitioner Vs. State of Haryana and another …..Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI. -.- Present:- Mr.Sushil Gautam, Advocate for the petitioner. -.- M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) Husband has sought the concession of pre-arrest bail in a criminal case registered at the instance of his wife Garima, inter-alia on the ground that the matter has now been compromised. Copy of the compromise dated May 11, 2011 has been placed on record as annexure P-8. Counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier petition for pre- arrest bail was dismissed on September 20, 2011. It could not be brought to the notice of the Court by the counsel for the petitioner or the counsel for Crl. Misc. No. M-33332 of 2011 [2] the complainant that vide annexure P-6, money had been received by the wife. At this stage, the second petition cannot be entertained because the document which is sought to be relied upon was already existing and was not brought to the notice of the Court. No ground is made out for entertaining the second petition for pre-arrest bail. Counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that it could not be brought to the notice of the Court that the matter has amicably been compromised and terms and conditions of the compromise has been complied with. It is contended that the complainant had wrongly stated before this Court that the matter has wrongly been compromised. I do not find any ground to grant the concession of pre-arrest bail by entering into the controversy whether the matter has been compromised or not. No ground is made out for interfering in the second petition. Dismissed as not maintainable. November 7, 2011 (M.M.S.BEDI) sanjay JUDGE