IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No.M- 3759 of 2010(O&M) Date of Decision: 05.04.2010. Gursahib Singh. ...... PETITIONER Versus State of Punjab. ...... RESPONDENT CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr. Arvind Thakur, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala, AAG, Punjab. ***** RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) The present petition has been filed by Gursahib Singh for regular bail under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure in FIR No.234 dated 19.11.2008 under Sections 223/224/225/120-B IPC registered at P.S. Sadar Abohar, District Ferozepur. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record. Briefly stated, allegations against the petitioner – accused are that one Jasbir Singh son of Ajaib Singh, resident of village Aslam Khera was in custody in FIR No.99 dated 18.07.2008, under Sections 302/148/149 IPC P.S. Khulan Sarwar, who was to be produced in another case i.e. FIR CRM No.M-3759 of 2010 No.18 of 2006, P.S. GRP Jaipur (Rajasthan) on 20.11.2008. HC.Dharam Pal and HC. Harnarian were deputed to produce him in that court in the aforesaid case and while on the way, the police officials had taken him to the house of the petitioner – accused, resident of village Kikkar Khera and the police officials in conspiracy with the present petitioner –accused facilitated the escape of accused Jasbir Singh and hence, Jasbir Singh was made to run from the house of petitioner – accused. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner – accused that petitioner and other co-accused were granted bail. It is further argued that however, petitioner could not appear before learned trial Court and hence, his bail bonds and surety bonds were cancelled and he was declared Proclaimed Offender vide order dated 23.10.2009. It has further argued that however, he has been arrested on 08.12.2009 and since then he has been continuing in custody. He has already suffered much and that as the conclusion of trial will take some time, he be granted concession of bail again. Bail application of the petitioner has been vehemently opposed by learned counsel for the State, on instruction from ASI. Gurnam Singh, on the plea that bail application of the petitioner – accused was cancelled on 06.03.2009 on the application moved by the prosecution. It is further contended that petitioner was to appear before Court on 12.3.2009 and however, he did not appear on 12.3.2009 as well and remained absconding and he was arrested on 05.12.2009. Hence, it is contended that in view of serious allegation against him and in view of the fact that he remained absconding for about 9 months, he is not entitled for concession of bail again. It is further contended that he is likely to abscond and that he is likely to 2 CRM No.M-3759 of 2010 dissuade the witnesses from disclosing true facts in the court if released on bail again. It is further contended that case is fixed for evidence of prosecution for today itself and that hence, trial can be expedited. I have considered all the facts and circumstances of the case. Allegations against the petitioner are that he connived with co- accused i.e. police officials and succeeded in getting Jasbir Singh, accused released from custody of police officials whereas Jasbir Singh was involved in a triple murder case and one other murder case. Petitioner – accused was granted concession of bail and however, he misused the same and remained absent from the court for about 9 months. Hence, keeping in view these facts and without expressing anything on the merit of the case, I am of the view that it is not such a case in which concession of bail should be granted to the accused again. There is no merit in the instant application for bail filed by Gursahib Singh and hence, the same is, hereby, dismissed. However, learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial as the petitioner has been continuing in custody since 08.12.2009 and efforts be made to conclude the trial within six months from the next date of hearing fixed before learned trial Court. Registry is directed to inform learned trial Court about this order. ( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) April 5, 2010. JUDGE 'om' 3