( 1 ) ). RULE. Service of Rule is waived by learned A. P. P. Mr. N. D. Gohil for the respondent-State.

( 2 ) ). Heard learned Counsel Mr. J. M. Panchal for the applicant-accused. This application under Sec. 438 of Cr. P. C. is filed by the applicant-accused apprehending his arrest in connection with CR. No. I. 220/2000 of Aslali Police station registered on 29/30-12-2000 for the offence punishable under Sec. 302 i. P. C. , praying to release himon anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest.

( 3 ) ). Learned Counsel for the applicant has taken me through the nature of allegations made in the F. I. R. and other relevant aspects mentioned in the application and both the affidavits viz. affidavit filed by the Investigating Officer and affidavit-in-rejoinder filed by the applicant.

( 4 ) ). It is settled legal position that the grant of anticipatory bail stands on altogether a different footing than the grant of regular bail. When serious offence is registered against the accused and police intends to arrest such accused for such serious offence at the initial stage, even if Court feels that the apprehension of the arrest in the mind of the accused is reasonable, in that event, various aspects needs consideration. One should not ignore the spirit and object of the provisions of Sec. 438 of Cr. P. C. This Court as well as Apex Court, time and again, have emphatically propounded that the discretion in favour of the person-accused praying for anticipatory bail should be exercised sparingly and in exceptional circumstances. Hence, the crucial question is that who can expect a bail in advance from the Court? Anticipatory bail is prayed and granted normally to avoid extreme hardships and inconvenience or harassment by investigating agency to a person who has never experienced or expected police arrest in a serious offence in the earlier part of his life or by a innocent and law-abiding citizen, prima facie, found falsely or mala fide implicated in a non-bailable offence with political or other vendetta, as an accused in a crime. A person who is having checkered history and against whom number of non-bailable offences of serious nature have been registered and trials are pending, whether should be granted advance bail, is also a question.

( 5 ) ). During the oral submissions, it is not disputed by the applicant that he was arrested earlier in 9 different offences registered against him in different police stations under Ahmedabad Police Commissionerate. In the instant case, investigating Officer, Mr. D. S. Chauhan, P. S. I, of Aslali Police Station has filed affidavit giving the details or say checkered history of the present applicant. I would like to refer statement attached with the affidavit of 1. 0. showing number of offences of grave nature registered against the present applicant, as under :- 1. Gaekwad Haveli I. CR. No. 161 of 1993 I. P. C. 302, 120b, 365, 387, 342, 201, 202, 212, 470, 471, 188 and T. A. D. A. 3, 5, Arms Act 25 (1)A etc. 2. Gaekwad Haveli I. CR. No. 60 of 1994 I. P. C. 302, 34, 120b, 465, 466, 470, 471, 202, T. A. D. A. 3, 5 etc. 3. Shahibag I. CR. No. 284 of 1993 I. P. C. 120b, 307. 365, T. A. D. A. 3, 5 etc. 4. Vatva I. CR. No. 92 of 1994 I. P. C. 395, 120b, 212, 465, 470, 471 t. A. D. A. 3, 5 etc. 5. Vejalpur I. CR. No. 28 of 1994 I. P. C. 365, 395, 465, 467, 470, 471, arms Act, 25c, T. A. D. A. 3, 5 etc. 6. Shahpur I. CR. No. 47 of 1994 I. P. C. 367: 114, 465, 468, 470, Arms act, 25 (1) BA. 7. Shahpur I. CR. No. 112 of 1994 I. P. C. 307, 452, 143, 147, 148, B. P. Act 135, Arms Act, 25 (1)C. 8. Ellisbridge I. CR. No. 29 of 1994 I. P. C. 307, 34, Arms Act 25 (1)C. 9. Rakhiyal I. CR. No. 94 of 1993 I. P. C. 302, 307, 120b, Arms Act. 25 (1)C etc.

( 6 ) ). Learned Counsel Mr. Panchal for the applicant has brought to the notice of this Court that out of aforesaid 9 cases, in 2 cases, the applicant has been acquitted and in two offences, he has been discharged by competent Court. Rest of the cases are