ANANT BIJAY SINGH, J. - (1.) All the five anticipatory bail applications arise out of different F.I.Rs, but in all the anticipatory bail applications similar question of law is involved; whether when during course of investigation the petitioners were released on police bail or bail was granted by the court below and subsequently after completion of investigation, police has submitted final form and cognizance has been taken by the court below in nonbailable sections differing with the opinion of the police, in this circumstances, whether anticipatory bail application is maintainable, in view of the fact that the bail bonds submitted by the petitioners were not cancelled and summons/bailable warrant of arrest and nonbailable warrant of arrest was issued; all the anticipatory bail applications were heard together. Before answering the aforesaid questions the brief facts of the case are as under : A.B.A. No.2775 of 2016
(2.) The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Sukhdeonagar P.S. Case No. 135 of 2015, corresponding to G.R. No. 7143 of 2015 for the offence registered under sections 341, 342, 323, 325, 307 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
(3.) Record reveals that; i. As per paragraph Nos. 69 and 70 of the case diary, the petitioners were granted bail by the police on 12.02.2016. ii. The police after investigation, submitted Final Form No. 88 of 2016 dated 25.02.2016 under sections 341, 342, 323, 325/34 of the I.P.C. against the petitioners showing the petitioners on police bail. iii. The learned C.J.M differing with the opinion of the police took cognizance of the offence under sections 341, 342, 323, 307, 34 of the I.P.C by order dated 27.02.2016 and directed to issue N.B.W against the petitioners. iv. The court below has not cancelled bail of the petitioners granted by police till date, nor has passed any order in terms of provision of Section 436(2) Cr.P.C. A.B.A. No. 779 of 2017 ;