REEMA SAINI 2026.07.16 19:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CRM-M-38158 of 2026 (O&M) -2- submits that it was the first time petitioner jumped bail, so he be allowed the concession of anticipatory bail. 3. Learned State counsel opposes the prayer on the ground that petitioner was a bail jumper and was not entitled to concession of anticipatory bail. 4. Hon’ble Supreme Court in Manish Jain Versus Haryana State Pollution Control Board, 2020(2) SCC 123, observed as under: ‘2. A person released on bail is already in the constructive custody of law. If the law requires him to come back to custody for specified reasons, we are afraid that an application for anticipatory bail apprehending arrest will not lie. There cannot be an apprehension of arrest by a person already in the constructive custody of the law. We, therefore, reject the prayer for anticipatory bail.’ 5. Petitioner having misused the concession of regular bail, is not entitled to discretionary relief of anticipatory bail. The appropriate course for him is to surrender before the Trial Court and seek regular bail. 6. Dismissed. All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand disposed of. (SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL) JUDGE 16.07.2026 reema Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes Whether reportable : No REEMA SAINI 2026.07.16 19:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh

REEMA SAINI 2026.07.16 19:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CRM-M-38158 of 2026 (O&M) -2- submits that it was the first time petitioner jumped bail, so he be allowed the concession of anticipatory bail. 3. Learned State counsel opposes the prayer on the ground that petitioner was a bail jumper and was not entitled to concession of anticipatory bail. 4. Hon’ble Supreme Court in Manish Jain Versus Haryana State Pollution Control Board, 2020(2) SCC 123, observed as under: ‘2. A person released on bail is already in the constructive custody of law. If the law requires him to come back to custody for specified reasons, we are afraid that an application for anticipatory bail apprehending arrest will not lie. There cannot be an apprehension of arrest by a person already in the constructive custody of the law. We, therefore, reject the prayer for anticipatory bail.’ 5. Petitioner having misused the concession of regular bail, is not entitled to discretionary relief of anticipatory bail. The appropriate course for him is to surrender before the Trial Court and seek regular bail. 6. Dismissed. All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand disposed of. (SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL) JUDGE 16.07.2026 reema Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes Whether reportable : No REEMA SAINI 2026.07.16 19:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh