IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No.M-34795 of 2009 Date of decision: 23.12.2009 Sukhwinder Singh ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. D. ANAND Present: Mr. D.S.Pheruman, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Anter Singh Brar, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. S. D. ANAND, J. The prosecution allegation is that the petitioner filed a factually incorrect affidavit in the Court of learned Trial Judge to the effect that bail application under adjudication was being filed for the first time; whereas the factually correct position was that the bail application under adjudication was second attempt for obtaining bail. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner states that the allegation would, at best, give rise to an offence under Sections 199 and 200 Cr.P.C. both of which are bailable in nature. Learned State Counsel states that he would accept the interpretation presented by the learned counsel for the petitioner, though only for the purpose of disposal of the anticipatory bail plea. He, however, reserves liberty to argue in favour of the framing of proper charge before the learned Trial Court. In view of the own presentation on behalf of the petitioner, it is apparent that the present anticipatory bail plea is not competent in the scheme of things under the Code of Criminal Procedure in the context of offences which are bailable in nature. The anticipatory bail plea shall stand disposed of accordingly. December 23, 2009 (S. D. ANAND) Pka JUDGE