Read Order: Inam v. State Of Haryana
Chandigarh, April 18, 2022: While dealing with an anticipatory bail plea of an accused anticipating arrest in an FIR registered against him for not abiding by the order of proclamation issued against him owing to his non-appearance during the investigation after being released on bail by the trial Court, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has reiterated that anticipatory bail on behalf of the petitioner who is a proclaimed offender is not maintainable.
The present petition before the Bench of Justice Jasgurpreet Singh Puri was filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in an FIR under Section 174-A IPC, registered at Police Station Partap Nagar, District Yamuna Nagar.
In this case, the petitioner was granted bail by the Trial Court ten years ago on March 13, 2012. But due to the non-compliance with the bail conditions, and the non-appearance of the accused petitioner, he was declared a proclaimed offender and thereafter the present FIR under Section 174-A IPC was registered.
The petitioner now sought the grant of pre-arrest bail to him in respect of this FIR.
The Court noted at the very outset that the petitioner was a proclaimed offender as of yet and he did not challenge the order by which he was declared as a proclaimed offender. In order to reflect upon the law suitable to the factual matrix of this case, the Court made reference to the judgment of the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma wherein it was held that when a person against whom a warrant had been issued and is absconding or concealing himself in order to avoid execution of warrant and declared as a proclaimed offender in terms of Section 82 of the Code he is not entitled to the relief of anticipatory bail.
Therefore, in light of the settled law, the High Court dismissed the present petition.