JUDGMENT

Anoop Chitkara, J. -

1. The petitioner apprehending arrest in the FIR captioned above has come up before this Court under Section 438(2) read with 482 Cr.PC seeking anticipatory bail.

2. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner contends that assailants were not previously known to the victim and the petitioner has been falsely roped in.

3. The contention on behalf of the State is that given the judicial pronouncements, anticipatory bail cannot be granted to a proclaimed offender.

REASONING:

4. The explanation offered by the petitioner is mentioned in paragraph 6 of the petition, whichare extracted as follows:

'That the petitioner had no knowledge about him being accused in this case. The petitioner was neither served nor any intimation with regard to his any alleged role in this case nor any intimation was supplied to him regard to presentation of challan and subsequently, he was declared offender w