Crl. Misc. No.M-28115 of 2010 ::1:: IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No.M-28115 of 2010 Date of decision: 16.11.2010 Rajesh and others .. Petitioners Versus Jagdish and another .. Respondent Present:- Mr.Kunal Dawar, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.R.N.Singal, Advocate, for respondent No.1-complainant. Mr.K.C.Gupta, Sr.DAG, Haryana. * * * * S.S. SARON, J. Heard counsel for the parties. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in a criminal complaint dated 16.07.2009 (Annexure P-1) that has been filed by the respondent No.1-Jagdish. The petitioners have been summoned by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Gurgaon, in terms of order dated 16.01.2010 (Annexure P-2) to face trial for the offences punishable under Sections 148, 149, 323, 325, 394 and 506 Indian Penal Code. The petitioners applied for pre-arrest bail in the case. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurgaon, vide order dated 28.04.2010 (Annexure P-3) ordered the release of the petitioners on bail to the satisfaction of learned Ilaqa Magistrate if they surrender before the concerned Court on or before 08.05.2010. The petitioners, however, did not surrender on or before 08.05.2010. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the learned Ilaqa Magistrate was on leave from 03/04.05.2010 to 12.05.2010 Crl. Misc. No.M-28115 of 2010 ::2:: and there was no order to surrender before the Duty Magistrate. Therefore, the petitioners could not surrender in terms of the order dated 28.04.2010 (Annexure P-3) passed by the learned Additional Session Judge, Gurgaon. It is also submitted that the Presiding Officer of the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurgaon was on leave from 05/06.05.2010 to 12.05.2010, therefore, the application for extension of time could also not be filed. The application was prepared on 13.05.2010. The Presiding Officer was on leave on 14.05.2010. Thereafter, the counsel for the petitioners was not well on 17.05.2010 and 18.05.2010. The application seeking extension of time has been declined vide order dated 31.08.2010 (Annexure P-5) by observing that the petitioners could appear before the learned Ilaqa Magistrate prior to 03.05.2010. Notice of motion was issued in the case on 23.09.2010 and in the meantime, the petitioners were directed to put in appearance before the learned Ilaqa Magistrate within three days from the receipt of copy of the order. However, in the event of arrest, they were to be released on bail. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted a copy of order dated 29.09.2010 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Gurgaon, wherein the petitioners have appeared before the said Court and have been admitted to regular bail on their furnishing bail bonds and surety in the sum of Rs.30,000/- each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate concerned. The bail bonds and surety on behalf of the accused have been furnished, accepted and attested. Mr.R.N.Singal, learned counsel appearing for the complainant has opposed the application and submitted that the petitioners were liable to appear before the trial Magistrate before 08.05.2010 and on Crl. Misc. No.M-28115 of 2010 ::3:: account of their failure to appear on the said date, the interim bail granted is liable to be cancelled. Besides, he submitted that the case involves serious allegations of causing hurt to the complainant-Jagdish. After giving my thoughtful consideration to the matter, it may be noticed that the petitioners have been summoned in a complaint case in which the custody of the petitioners is not required for the purposes of investigation. The complainant is to establish and prove his allegations as made in the complaint. The petitioners cannot be incarcerated by pre- judging their guilt at this stage. In consequence of the interim order passed by this Court on 23.09.2010, the petitioners have put in appearances before the learned Judicial Magistrate concerned and have furnished their bail bonds and sureties. The reasons for non-appearance given by the petitioners are valid reasons on account of which they could not put in their appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate concerned. In the facts and circumstances, the interim bail granted on 23.09.2010 is made absolute. The criminal miscellaneous petition stands disposed of. (S.S. SARON) November 16, 2010 JUDGE sukhpreet