RUPESH AHUJA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER seeks the concession of pre -arrest bail apprehending arrest on account of having been absent on 17.1.2013 claiming that on account of illness of his son, he was not able to appear before the trial Court. A perusal of the order dated 17.1.2013 indicates that neither any witness was present nor any effective hearing was to be conducted by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kapurthala. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Kapurthala, has dismissed the application for pre -arrest bail on the ground that the petitioner cannot be granted the pre -arrest bail in a bailable offence under Section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act being bailable.

(2.) SINCE the petitioner is apprehending arrest pursuant to non -bailable warrants on account of his absence on a date of hearing, there is reasonable apprehension of arrest pursuant to the non -bailable warrants as such there was no bar for the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kapurthala, to entertain the application under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

(3.) ON asking of the Court, notice has been accepted by Mr. G.S. Sidhu, AAG, present in the Court. Copy given. In the interest of justice and expeditious disposal of the trial, I deem it appropriate to give an opportunity to the petitioner to rejoin the stream of due process of law by putting in appearance before the trial Court on or before 5.7.2013. In case of petitioner doing so, he shall be released on bail on his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of said Court subject to the condition that the petitioner will not absent himself during the entire period of trial without any sufficient cause or without seeking exemption in accordance with law. It is made clear that in case of noncompliance of the order, this petition will be deemed to have been dismissed.