Crl. Misc. No.M-18647 of 2011 1 IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No.M-18647 of 2011(O&M) Date of Decision: 13.07.2011 Gurmeet Singh and another ...Petitioners Versus State of Haryana ..Respondent CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. B. S. Dhillon, Advocate for the petitioners. ..... RAJESH BINDAL, J. In the present case, on March 7, 2011, the petitioners were granted benefit of pre-arrest bail on the condition that they will surrender before the Area Magistrate/Duty Magistrate within a week from the date of the order. It was specifically mentioned therein that on failure, the application shall be deemed to have been dismissed. It is not disputed that the petitioners did not appear before the Magistrate within the time granted. As is available on record, on April 8, 2011, the petitioners approached this Court seeking anticipatory bail. This Court disposed of the petition with an observation that the petitioners should first approach the learned court below for extension of time. The petitioners thereafter, approached the learned court below on April 29, 2011. When the application was taken up, notice was ordered to be issued for 11.5.2011 and the same was dismissed in default on that day on the account of non-appearance of the counsel for the petitioners. Fresh application was filed on May 26, 2011, which was dismissed by the learned court below vide order dated 30.5.2011. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners could not surrender within the time granted by the learned court below, as there were two marriages in the family, which were scheduled for Crl. Misc. No.M-18647 of 2011 2 March 15, 2011 but the facts of the case as noticed above clearly show that this fact was not brought to the notice of the court below either on the date when the benefit of pre-arrest bail was granted to the petitioners or immediately thereafter seeking extension of time for surrender. The petitioners are apparently taking the order passed by the court casually and want to comply with the same at their own wills, which cannot be permitted. Considering the aforesaid facts, I do not find any merit in the present petition. Dismissed. (RAJESH BINDAL) JUDGE 13.07.2011 sharmila