Ram Chand Gupta, J. - (1.) THE present petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 5, dated 3.1.2006, under Section 420 IPC, registered at Police Station Samana, District Patiala. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the whole record carefully, including the impugned order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala, vide which application filed on behalf of the present petitioner for anticipatory bail was dismissed.
(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the petitioner was facing trial in the aforementioned case. He was on bail. However, admittedly he jumped bail and went abroad, i.e., Malaysia, without seeking permission of the Court. He had been absconding for the last seven years. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner -accused that co -accused already faced trial and though they were convicted by learned trial Court and, however, they were acquitted by the Court of Sessions in appeal and hence, it is contended that case of present petitioner is also on similar footings and hence, he deserves concession of anticipatory bail. He has also placed reliance upon Gurwinder Singh @ Mintu v. State of Punjab, 2012(3) RCR (Cri.) 360 and Sudo Mandal @ Diwarak Mandal v. State of Punjab : 2011(2) RCR (Cri.) 453.
(3.) HOWEVER , in this case, petitioner has misused the concession of bail. He was released on bail and, however, he jumped bail and went to Malaysia without seeking permission of the Court. He remained absconding for a period of about seven years. Hence, in view of these facts, it is not such a case in which extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail should be granted to him. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition filed by petitioner -Resham Singh for grant of anticipatory bail is, hereby, dismissed being devoid of any merit.;