Crl. Misc. No. M-36549 of 2010 (O&M) (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-36549 of 2010 (O&M) DATE OF DECISION: 20.12.2010 Gurdit Singh ..........Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ..........Respondent BEFORE:- HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY Present:- Mr. Aman Pal, Advocate for the petitioner. **** DAYA CHAUDHARY, J. Crl. Misc. No. 65971 of 2010 This is an application for placing on record Annexure P-7. Application is allowed and Annexure P-7 is taken on record. Crl. Misc. No. M-37276 of 2010 The present petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail has been filed on behalf Gurdit Singh in case FIR No. 16 dated 3.3.2004 registered under Sections 452 and 354 IPC at Police Station Naggal, District Ambala. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that earlier the petitioner was granted regular bail and was attending the Court proceedings regularly. On 17.2.2005, the petitioner was not present and an application for exemption was moved on the ground that the petitioner was suffering from back ache and accordingly the personal appearance of the petitioner was exempted and thereafter the case was adjourned on Crl. Misc. No. M-36549 of 2010 (O&M) (2) 18.4.2005 for recording evidence of the prosecution. The file was taken up on 19.4.2005 as 18.4.2005 was declared holiday and then the case was adjourned to 29.7.2005. On 29.7.2005, the petitioner was not present and consequently his bail bonds were cancelled and forfeited to the State. Learned counsel further contends that since the petitioner has shifted his residence to Hasuwal, Post Office Nadhala, District Kapurthala in Punjab and as service was not effected, the petitioner was wrongly declared P.O. inspite of the fact that the report was received that the petitioner was not residing in the village and no villager was having any knowledge with regard to his residence. Learned counsel further contends that even on the basis of zimni orders, it cannot be said that the presence of the petitioner could not be procured or inspite of service upon the petitioner, deliberately and intentionally, he was not present and was avoiding the services of the Court orders. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is ready to surrender before the Court and to join the Court proceedings. Learned counsel has stated that marriage of the petitioner is fixed for 22.12.2010 and to support his contention, marriage card is also annexed with this petition. I have heard the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner and have also gone through the zimni orders and other documents available on record. Although the order declaring the petitioner P.O. was passed in the year 2007 and the petitioner has approached this Court after a lapse of more than three years but since he was on bail and could not be served at the address given before the Court as he has shifted his residence. The fact that the absence of the petitioner from the Court proceedings was not intentional or deliberate, he is directed to surrender before the trial Court within one week from the date of receipt of copy of the order. In case, the petitioner appears before the trial Court and furnishes bail bond and surety Crl. Misc. No. M-36549 of 2010 (O&M) (3) bonds, he shall be released on bail to its satisfaction subject to payment of costs of Rs.15,000/-, which shall be deposited before Legal Services Authority, Haryana. December 20, 2010 (DAYA CHAUDHARY) pooja JUDGE Note:-Whether this case is to be referred to the Reporter .......Yes/No