Crl. Misc. No.M-9995 of 2011 ::1:: IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No.M-9995 of 2011 Date of decision: 19.04.2011 Vijay Kumar .. Petitioner Versus State of Punjab .. Respondent Present:- Mr.Rajiv Joshi, Advocate, for the petitioner. * * * * S.S. SARON, J. Heard counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner during the trial of the case absented himself and did not appear on 28.01.2011. In terms of the order dated 28.01.2011 (Annexure P-3) passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur, three prosecution witnesses namely Sarabjit Kumar, Prem Kumar and Kamla Devi were present. However, they could not be examined due to non-appearance of the petitioner. The counsel for the petitioner submitted an application seeking exemption from appearance. Certified copy of which has been submitted in Court during the course of hearing. In the said application, it was stated that the petitioner was suffering from chicken pox and fever and the doctors had advised him bed- rest. The medical certificate (Annexure P-2) which has been placed on record is dated 20.01.2011 and there is no mention in the said certificate that he was suffering from chicken pox and fever. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner had in fact instructed his counsel that he was suffering from chest pain and fever. However, the counsel Crl. Misc. No.M-9995 of 2011 ::2:: wrongly mentioned chicken pox and fever; besides, it is submitted that the date of the certificate is 28.01.2011 and because it is not clear in the original certificate (Annexure P-2) therefore, it came to be typed as 20.01.2011. It may however be noticed that the learned Sessions Judge, did not find any genuineness in the request made by the petitioner. Accordingly, his bail bonds were cancelled. It may also be noticed that the order declining bail was passed on 28.01.2011, the petitioner was summoned through warrants of arrest for 15.03.2011. However, the petitioner applied for certified copy of the order on 25.03.2011 and it was given to him on the same date. It is thereafter that the present petition was filed in this Court on 28.03.2011. Therefore, the petitioner indeed has been quite casual in the matter, therefore, he is not entitled to the concession of pre-arrest bail. The criminal miscellaneous petition is accordingly dismissed. However, in case, the petitioner surrenders before the learned trial Court on the next date for appearance i.e. 26.04.2011, his application for regular bail shall be considered on the same date. (S.S. SARON) April 19, 2011 JUDGE sukhpreet