TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (3) TMI 1596
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....application by the Additional Sessions Judge, Panipat, vide order dated 06.01.2022 (Annexure P-2), the petitioner had approached this Court for the grant of concession of anticipatory bail by filing CRM-M-2416-2022, in which, the following order was passed: - "Present: Mr. Ajay Ghangas, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Praveen Bhadu, AAG, Haryana. (Through Video Conferencing) **** VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL) Prayer in the present petition is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No.134 dated 08.03.2021 registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station Samalkha, District Panipat. After arguing for sometime, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... petition, was not inclined to grant the same, thus, learned counsel for the petitioner had made the above-said prayer to get his bail petition decided expeditiously after his surrender before the police within the said period of 10 days. Instead of complying with the statement made by learned counsel for the petitioner at the time of hearing of order dated 21.01.2022, to surrender before the police within a period of 10 days, the petitioner has chosen to file the present second anticipatory petition, which has been drafted on 28.02.2022, after the lapse of the said period of 10 days and has came up for hearing today. Perusal of the entire petition would show that no reason has been given to justify the non-compliance of the statement made....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... was filed after undergoing two years of custody, has been rejected, it would be open for that person to come after a year or after a substantial period of further custody has been undergone by him and the Courts could well grant the concession of bail to the accused on the ground of "period of custody undergone". In the subsequent regular bail applications, there could be several factors in addition to long incarceration, which could be raised for instance, it could also be shown that there was a delay in the trial or that some material witness has demolished the case of the prosecution, which would come within the meaning of changed circumstances, so as to grant the relief to the accused therein. Similar would be the position in the case ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... found that a forged affidavit in the name of the complainant had been prepared on a stamp paper of Rs.101/- bearing G.R.N. No.43950556 and certificate No.Q BK 2019 B 40 dated 11.02.2019 and on the same, the accused had forged the signatures of the complainant and it was then attested from notary public and was presented by the present petitioner before the investigating officer so as to make out a false case against the present complainant. The complainant after applying under the Right Information Act, 2005, learnt that the stamp paper which was used with respect to the said affidavit, signed by the accused in the name of the complainant, was actually issued by stamp vendor Maman Singh Chhokar on 11.02.2019 and the first party in the same....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to the police and thus, does not deserve the grant of concession of anticipatory bail and hence, his custodial interrogation is necessary in order to complete the chain of events comprising the commission of the alleged offences. Thus, even on merits, the present second petition for anticipatory bail deserves to be rejected. Before parting with the present order, it would also be relevant to note that although, no argument in this regard has been raised by learned counsel for the petitioner, but an order dated 01.02.2022, passed by this Court granting bail to co-accused Roshan Lal has been annexed as Annexure A-3. The interim order in the said case was passed on 20.12.2021, as is apparent from a bare reading of the said order. The learned ....