CHHAJJU RAM GODARA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application. on behalf of the four petitioners for the grant of anticipatory bail by this Court Under Section 438 of the Cr. PC

(2.) THE case allegedly registered againt them under which they foresee apprehension by the police is an ordinary one Under Section 430 of the IPC It appears to be the admitted position that the petitioners do own land in village Mmbri which is irrigated through Ratta Khera Distributary from which the unauthorised irrigation is said to have taken place. It has been averred on their behalf that the petitioners are relations of a former Minister for Local Government in the erstwhile Congress Ministry in the State of Haryana. It is however significant U note that on the petitioners' own showing no case has been registered against the said Minister though it is sought to be suggested that the petitioners are being falsely implicated because of their relationship with him.

(3.) IN the recent judgment of their Lordships of the Supreme Court report-as Balchand Jain v. State of Madhya Pradesh 1977 Cur LJ (Cri) 11 : 1977 Cri LJ 225 (SC), Bhagwati J. , has observed that this power of granting anticipatory bail is extra-ordinary in character and it is only in exceptional cases where it appears that a person might be falsely implicated or a frivolous case might be launched against him that resort is to be made to this provision. Fazal Alit J. , who prepared the main concurring judgment therein has noticed the limitations implicit in the exercise of the power Under Section 438, Cr. PC in the following terms (at p. 235) :