SUKHJIT SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Prayer in the present petition is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in FIR No.121 dtd. 8/5/2017 registered under Ss. 307, 324, 323, 341, 427, 506, 148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station Dakha, District Ludhiana (Punjab).

(2.) At the outset, learned Senior Counsel for the complainant as well as the Learned Counsel for the State have raised a preliminary objection to the effect that in the present case, the petitioner before seeking anticipatory bail on 5/10/2021, which was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge Ludhiana vide the Impugned Order dtd. 11/10/2021 (Annexure P-13), had applied for anticipatory bail before the Additional Sessions Judge in September 2021 and on 23/9/2021, the same was withdrawn. He has referred to order dtd. 23/9/2021, which is reproduced hereinbelow:-

(3.) Learned Senior Counsel for the complainant and the State Counsel have further submitted that in the present petition, there is no mention regarding the fact that the first petition for anticipatory bail had been withdrawn and have argued that since the first anticipatory bail application was withdrawn on 23/9/2021, without seeking any liberty to file a fresh petition for anticipatory bail, thus, the second petition for anticipatory bail, which was filed on 5/10/2021, is not maintainable. It is further argued that no subsequent circumstance/special circumstance/exceptional circumstance from the date of the withdrawal of the first bail application has been mentioned in the subsequent anticipatory bail application and thus, the second anticipatory bail application deserved to be dismissed on the said ground alone and the present petition also deserves to be dismissed as neither the first order of withdrawal has been challenged nor the same has been brought to the notice of this court. It is also submitted that the practice of withdrawing an application for anticipatory bail without giving any reason and then subsequently filing another application for anticipatory bail should be discouraged inasmuch as, in case, the said practice is not deprecated then the same could lead to forum shopping and also avoiding a particular bench or a Court. It is submitted that the petitioner had an apprehension of arrest on 23/9/2021 and the said apprehension was no different from the one on 5/10/2021 and thus, without there being any special/cogent reason, the second anticipatory bail application should not be entertained. It is argued that the only conceivable reason for withdrawing an anticipatory bail application is that the Court was not inclined to grant the relief sought, moreso, when it is not even the case of the petitioner that there were some technical defects/typographical errors or suchlike issues in the first anticipatory bail application.