CRM-M-31778-2011 (O&M) [ 1 ] :::::::: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-31778-2011 (O&M) Date of decision:18 .11.2011 Balwinder Singh Lambardar ...Petitioner Versus The State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr. M.L.Saggar, Senior Advocate, with Mr. D.S.Brar, Advocate, for the petitioner. ***** RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. This is a petition filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [for short “Cr.P.C.”] for pre-arrest blanket bail. The petitioner has alleged that he is a resident of village Gaddian, Tehsil Nabha, District Patiala and a Trustee of Baba Gandha Singh Educational Trust and a follower of Sant Baba Tek Singh, Gurudwara Gurusar Patshahi Nauvin, Dhanaula, Tehsil and District Barnala. It is further alleged that said Baba Tek Singh is the President of Baba Gandha Singh Educational Trust and Mohatmim of the Gurudwara which is running public schools at Baranala, Bahadaur and Mehel Kalan in District Barnala. The petitioner has made a reference of CWP No.7931 of 1999 which is alleged to have been filed by Sant Baba Tek Singh against the State of Punjab and others in which he had sought a mandamus to protect the personal property of the petitioner therein and Gurudwara Gurusar Patshahai Nauvin, Dhanaula comprising of an area measuring 110 Bighas 19 Biswas and land measuring 14 Kanals 16 Marlas situated in village Dhanaula, District Sangrur, but in the said writ petition it was submitted before the Court by the learned counsel for the State that no CRM-M-31778-2011 (O&M) [ 2 ] :::::::: action will be taken by the District Administration for dispossessing the said petitioner without complying with the relevant provisions of law. In view thereof, the said writ petition was disposed of as infructuous on 21.09.1999. There is a reference of another CWP No.20137 of 2010 which was filed by four institutions being run by Sant Baba Gandha Singh Educational Trust in order to protect their property. Only one order dated 11.11.2010 is produced on record in which notice of motion was issued for 10.01.2011 and during the pendency of the petition, the SSP, Barnala was directed to ensure adequate protection of the property in dispute and avoid any disturbance in the running of the schools. Nothing has been brought before this Court as to what had happened thereafter. There is also a reference of CRM-M-33381-2010, which is alleged to have been filed by four persons including the petitioner, who is arrayed as petitioner No.3 in the said case, in which the prayer was made for pre-arrest blanket bail. The said case was disposed of because it was submitted by the learned counsel for the State that there is neither any FIR nor any proposal for arrest of the petitioners and if any need would arise or complaint would be received, a 3 days' notice shall be given to them. There is a reference of another case bearing CRM-M-29094-2011 which was filed only by Baba Tek Singh for the purpose of pre-arrest blanket bail in which he had claimed that he, being the Mahant of Gurudwara Sahib at Dhanaula and being the President of Baba Gandha Singh Educational Trust, is apprehending his false involvement in a criminal case. In the said case, it was brought to the notice of the Court that one FIR No.308 dated 24.09.2011, under Sections 406, 408, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC has already been registered against the said Baba Tek Singh and others and a separate petition has been filed by him seeking pre-arrest bail in that specific FIR. It was observed in the said petition, i.e. CRM-M-29094-2011, that it has outlived its utility, but while disposing of the petition as infructuous, a direction was issued that if Baba Tek Singh is required to be arrested in any other case pertaining to the management of Baba Gandha Singh Educational Trust or the affairs of Gurudwara Nauvin Patshahi, Dhanaula, then a prior 5 days' notice shall be CRM-M-31778-2011 (O&M) [ 3 ] :::::::: given to him by the prosecution agency. It was also made clear that the order shall remain operative for a period of 6 months. In the present case, it is further alleged that while praying for pre-arrest blanket bail in CRM-M-29094-2011, this Court was informed that the FIR has already been registered against Baba Tek Singh on the allegation that he had misappropriated the funds of the school in the capacity of Chairman of Baba Gandha Singh Public School, Barnala. It was, thus, observed that the State of Punjab may report as to whether Baba Tek Singh is required to be arrested in any other criminal case in the State of Punjab but in the meantime, it was observed that he will positively join investigation on 24.09.2011 and in case he is required to be arrested in any other criminal case registered against him, 5 days' notice will be issued to him in writing. The petitioner has alleged that on 24.09.2011, he accompanied Baba Tek Singh to the office of SP(D), Barnala. At that time, Baba Tek Singh was taken to Police Station City, Barnala and the petitioner followed him, but he was sounded that he was also likely to be arrested. It is also alleged that he owns 15 acres of land at village Akbarpur, Tehsil Bhawanigarh, District Sangrur. On the basis of false complaints, the petitioner was summoned by the police at Police Station Sunam, but due to intervention of respectables no case could be registered against him. In this background, learned counsel for the petitioner has prayed for pre-arrest blanket bail. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the available record from which I have found that the petitioner does not deserve the concession of pre-arrest blanket bail because of his own conduct as the present petition was drafted on 26.09.2011 which is evident from the date of the petition as well as the date put on the power of attorney. The index of the petition was typed on 17.10.2011 apparently after waiting for the order passed in CRM-M-29094-2011. It was filed on 18.10.2011 and when it was listed on 21.10.2011, no-one had appeared on behalf of the petitioner and the following order was passed by the Court: “Present: None. CRM-M-31778-2011 (O&M) [ 4 ] :::::::: In the interest of justice, adjourned to 23.11.2011.” Thereafter, the petitioner had filed CRM-59722-2011 for preponement of the date of hearing without disclosing as to why he did not appear on the date when the case was listed on 21.10.2011. However, the said application for preponement of hearing was listed on 07.11.2011 in which the following order was passed: “Be listed as per roster after soliciting orders from Hon'ble the Chief Justice.” Thereafter, the case was listed before this Court on 16.11.2011. From the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I have found that there is no urgency or imminent threat to the life and liberty of the petitioner for which he could be extended the extraordinary relief of pre-arrest blanket bail. Moreover, except for one petition, i.e. CRM-M-33381-2010 for pre-arrest blanket bail, no other case has either been filed by the petitioner and unlike the order dated 14.10.2011 passed in CRM-M-29094-2011, there is no period fixed by this Court in the CRM-M-33381-2010 about its operation. Thus, in view of the above discussion, I do not find any merit in the present petition for the purpose of granting pre-arrest blanket bail in this petition. Hence, the same is hereby dismissed. November 18, 2011 (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) vinod* JUDGE