Crl.M.No.M-28875 of 2010 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl.M.No.M-28875 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision:October 4, 2010 Madan Mohan Manchanda .....Petitioner v. State of U.T., Chandigarh .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr.M.S.Jandiala, Advocate for the petitioner. ...... RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) Crl.M.Nos.52376-77 of 2010 Both the applications are allowed subject to all just exceptions. Annexures A1 to A3 are taken on record. Applications stand disposed of accordingly. Crl.M.No.51636 of 2010 Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Crl.M.No.M-28875 of 2010 The present petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.98, dated 11.4.2010, under Sections 448, 457, 380 IPC, registered at Police Station Manimajra, U.T., Chandigarh. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the whole record carefully, including the impugned order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chandigarh, vide which application filed on behalf of the present petitioner for anticipatory bail was dismissed. Brief allegations against the petitioner-accused are that petitioner was tenant in the premises in dispute. The complainant had taken the possession of the same from him as per law with the police help. Ejectment order was passed against the petitioner by Rent Controller. Crl.M.No.M-28875 of 2010 (O&M) -2- Appeal was dismissed by the Appellate Authority. He approached this Court and however, his petition was dismissed by this Court as well. He did not prefer any SLP before Hon'ble Apex Court. Possession was taken by the complainant. Further allegations are that however, in the absence of complainant, petitioner alongwith co-accused entered the said premises forcibly and taken away some goods after breaking open the locks. Petitioner filed first bail application before learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chandigarh, which was dismissed on merit vide order dated 17.4.2010. He filed another anticipatory bail application on the same facts before learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chandigarh, however, the same was got dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 1.9.2010. However, learned Additional Sessions Judge gave opportunity to the petitioner to surrender before the Court within a week and his application for regular bail was ordered to be decided on merit on the same day Petitioner was to surrender within a week as per order of learned Additional Sessions Judge. He filed application for surrender lateron before leaned Magistrate and however, the application for surrender was also withdrawn by the petitioner and rather he filed another application before learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chandigarh, for extension of time for surrender, which was dismissed. In view of these facts, it is not such a case in which extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner- accused. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition filed by petitioner-Madan Mohan Manchanda for grant of anticipatory bail is, hereby, dismissed being devoid of any merit. 4.10.2010 (Ram Chand Gupta) meenu Judge