CRM No. M-33129 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CRM No. M-33129 of 2008 (O&M) Date of decision: 17.02.2009 Tarsem Lal @ Sema ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. N.S. Rapri, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Shailesh Gupta, DAG, Punjab. Rajan Gupta, J. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner never intended to evade the trial and his absence therefrom was totally unintentional. He further submits that the petitioner could not attend the court on 15th July, 1997 as he had gone to France because his visa was going to expire. Now he has come to know about the proclamation order passed against him. However, the petitioner wants to submit before the trial Court and face trial. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, I do not find it a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail as the petitioner has already been declared a proclaimed offender vide order dated 18th December, 1997. However, in case the petitioner submits before the trial court and surrenders his passport, his plea for regular bail shall be considered by the trial court, which shall be decided within a week. The CRM No. M-33129 of 2008 2 arrest of the petitioner shall remain stayed till then. However, the order of stay of arrest shall cease to operate on the date, the bail application is decided. It is clarified that the prayer for regular bail shall be considered on merits keeping in view the offences alleged in the complaint. Disposed of. (RAJAN GUPTA) JUDGE February 17, 2009 'rajpal'