Criminal Misc. No. M-32420 of 2008 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh. Criminal Misc. No. M-32420 of 2008 Date of Decision: 9.3.2009 Madan Lal Bajaj …Petitioner Versus State of Haryana …Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA. Present: Mr.Jagjit Gill, Advocate for Mr. Raj Mohan Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. S.S. Mor, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, for the State. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral) Petitioner was facing trial in case FIR No. 757 dated 6.10.2008 registered at Police Station City Sirsa, District Sirsa, under Sections 186, 353, 332, 506 & 34 IPC. Petitioner was also named as accused in another case FIR bearing No. 759 dated 7.10.2008 registered at Police Station City, Sirsa, under Sections 201, 206, 434, & 380 IPC. Pre-arrest bail was declined to the petitioner in that case and following observations were made by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 24.12.2008 in Criminal Misc. No. M- 29919 of 2008:- “While examining the records as a whole the petitioners do not deserve the concession of bail Criminal Misc. No. M-32420 of 2008 2 under Section 438 Cr.P.C. As regards the bail granted to Pawan Kumar Bajaj their co-accused, he was released on the ground that he was in custody on that day. However, the Petitioners being the owners of the shop would be only beneficiaries for removing the drugs under the control of the Drug Control Officers. The petitioners obstructed the public servant in discharge of their official duty; tampered with the evidence and removed the incriminating articles from the shop before the same could be taken into possession. As such, their custodial interrogation has become essential. Consequently, under these circumstances, benefit of extra ordinary provisions of Section 438 Cr.P.C. could not be extended in their favour. Resultantly, finding no merit in the petitions the same are declined”. Counsel for the petitioner has contended that all offences are bailable except offence under Section 506 IPC. The petitioner is also facing trial under Section 353 IPC for causing obstruction to the public servant and under Section 332 IPC for causing injury to public servant. Three officials who went to the shop of co-accused, in discharge of official duties, were given beatings by the petitioner. The findings given in the earlier order dated 24.12.2008 passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. No. M- 29919 of 2008 that bail cannot be granted to the petitioners as they had Criminal Misc. No. M-32420 of 2008 3 caused obstruction stand in the way to accept prayer of the petitioner. Petitioner has been granted regular bail in another FIR. Petitioner may seek regular bail in this case also. I am of the view that the observations made in Criminal Misc. No. M-29919 of 2008 stand in way of the petitioner. Therefore, this Court is constrained not to extend the benefit of interim bail. Hence, the present petition is dismissed. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge March 9, 2009 “DK”