IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-9122 of 2009 Date of decision : 13.08.2009 Sunil Kumar Sharma ....Petitioner V/s State of Punjab ....Respondent BEFORE : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. B.S. Guliani, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Shailesh Gupta, DAG Punjab. Mr. Gurcharan Dass, Advocate for the complainant. RAJAN GUPTA J. (ORAL) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has not received any further instructions from the petitioner and is therefore, unable to address further arguments in the case. According to the counsel, the petitioner has not contacted him after 18.08.2009, when the interim order granting pre-arrest bail was passed by this court. Learned counsel for the State (on instructions from ASI Manjit Singh, who is present in court) has submitted that petitioner has not complied with the order dated 18.08.2009. According to the counsel, neither the petitioner has joined the investigation nor is present at the address given in the title of the petition. Learned counsel has further submitted that efforts were made by the investigating officer to locate the petitioner. It was, however, found that he has sold the house, address of which is mentioned in the petition. He has, thus, prayed for dismissal of the Crl. Misc. No. M-9122 of 2009 -2- petition. Learned counsel has emphasized that in the order dated 18.08.2009 it was made clear that in case the petitioner does not cooperate with the investigating agency, petition shall be liable to be dismissed. I have heard counsel for the parties. It is evident that petitioner has failed to cooperate with the investigating agency and has thus dis-entitled himself to the concession of pre-arrest bail. The petition is thus dismissed. 13.10.2009 (RAJAN GUPTA) Ajay JUDGE