Back
SANDEEP MOUDGIL
Gulab Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of the case and charges (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. maintainability of second anticipatory bail application (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. petitioner's concealment of prior undertakings (Para 5 , 10 , 12) |
| 4. reasons for dismissing the bail application and imposing costs. (Para 6) |
| 5. court observations on conduct and compliance with previous orders. (Para 8 , 11 , 13 , 15) |
| 6. consequences of misleading the court (Para 16 , 22) |
| 7. distinction from precedent case law (Para 17 , 18) |
| 8. implications of misrepresentation in legal proceedings (Para 19 , 23) |
| 9. dismissal of application and imposition of costs (Para 24 , 25) |
JUDGMENT
Mr. Sandeep Moudgil, J. (Oral)
The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked for the second time under Section 438 Cr.P.C., for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.145, dated 03.05.2021, under Sections 148 , 149, 323, 302 324 and 506 IPC, registered at Police Station Nissing, District Karnal.
2. The facts as has been unfolded could be narrated out on perusal of the FIR, which is reproduced hereinbelow:-
A second anticipatory bail application is non-maintainable if the petitioner conceals prior court orders and fails to comply with commitments to surrender, reflecting bad faith toward the court.
Abuse of the process of the Court by filing subsequent/successive anticipatory bail applications without justification.
(1) Anticipatory bail petition – Once first anticipatory bail is denied without there being any change in fact situation, second application for same relief under Section 438 Cr.P.C. cannot be entert....
Second anticipatory bail petitions under Section 438 Cr.P.C. are maintainable if substantial changes in circumstances are demonstrated; mere reliance on new documents is insufficient.
A second or successive anticipatory bail petition is maintainable only if substantial changes in circumstances are demonstrated; mere reiteration of previous grounds is insufficient.
The court emphasized the need for tangible grounds for anticipatory bail and the duty to balance individual freedom and police investigation rights.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
