H.S.BEDI, J. - (1.) THIS is an application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in first Information Report No. 99 dated 25.6.1993, under Sections 409/467/468/120-B of the Indian Penal Code. The allegations against the petitioner are that in the year 1983 when he was Sarpanch of village Qilla Natha Singh, he embezzled a sum of Rs. 233/- which led to the registration of the aforesaid case. He was granted anticipatory bail on 21.10.1985 by Shri M.L. Single, the then Additional Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur and he continued attending proceedings in the trial Court.
(2.) IT has been averred in the petition that in the month of December, 1992 due to terrorist threats, the petitioner migrated to Uttar Pradesh along with his family with the result that he could not appear in the Court of Trial Magistrate and as a result thereof the anticipatory bail granted to him was cancelled. It has been further averred that in month of February, 1994 on return of normalcy in the law and order situation, the petitioner came back to his village. On meeting his counsel, the petitioner was informed that non- bailable warrants had been issued by the trial Court. He once again filed an application for anticipatory bail before the Additional Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur but the same was declined on 9.3.1994. Aggrieved thereby the petitioner has approached this Court for anticipatory bail. Notice was issued to the Advocate-General Punjab and appearance has been put in by the State counsel as well as by the complainant Mohinder Singh through his counsel. It has been conceded before me by the learned counsel for the complainant that the allegations against the petitioner did pertain to embezzlement of Rs. 233/- only. It has also been admitted that Harcharan Singh, co-accused of petitioner, has already been acquitted of the charges on 30.3.1994. Be that as it may, the petitioner suffered these proceedings from June 1983 upto December 1992 when he went away to Uttar Pradesh and the proceedings have still not culminated. I am, therefore, of the view that continuance of proceedings which involve a petty amount of embezzlement is an abuse of process of court. I, therefore, taking recourse to Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and Article 227 of the Constitution of India and acting suo moto quash the proceedings against the petitioner.;