IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-9155 of 2009 Date of decision : August 10, 2009 Des Raj Rana ....Petitioner versus Union Territory, Chandigarh ....Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice L.N. Mittal Present : Mr. GBS Dhillon, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. NS Shekhawat, Advocate for UT Chandigarh L.N. Mittal, J. (Oral) Des Raj Rana has filed this petition for bail in case FIR No. 216 dated 9.4.2008, under sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, Police Station Sector-39, Chandigarh. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file. Learned counsel for the petitioner claimed parity with co-accused Ajay Rana who has been granted bail vide order dated 24.9.2008, Annexure P/1, by this Court. However, this claim of parity is not tenable because it has been specifically observed in the said order that the same is not to be read as precedent qua present petitioner Des Raj Rana. Not only this, after passing of order dated 24.9.2008, Annexure P/1 on bail petitions of Criminal Misc. No. M-9155 of 2009 -2- two co-accused, bail petition of the petitioner was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 18.12.2008, obviously after taking into consideration that petitioner's two co-accused had been granted bail vide order Annexure P/1. Consequently, the petitioner cannot claim benefit of order Annexure P/1. No fresh ground for releasing the petitioner on bail is made out except that petitioner is in custody since 9.4.2008 i.e. for more than a year and four months. In view of the aforesaid, the instant petition for bail is dismissed but the prosecution is directed to expedite its evidence in the trial court. ( L.N. Mittal ) August 10, 2009 Judge 'dalbir'