SHAHID HAMEED DAR, J. - This is the second post arrest bail application of the petitioner, first having been dismissed as withdrawn on 15.11.2010 after it had been argued at full length.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case, the charge is groundless and offence does not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497, Cr.P.C. Further submits that the petitioner was arrested on 2.10.2010 challan under Section 173, Cr.P.C. Stands submitted, before the Court concerned and he is no more required for further investigation.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the available record.
4. The first post arrest bail application of the petitioner (Crl. Misc. No. 1899-B/2010) was dismissed as withdrawn but not before the learned counsel for the petitioner had argued the same at full length and had sensed its outcome'. The petitioner was nominated as an accused of this case by the complainant on 18.11.2008 whereafter he skipped and turned fugitive from law. He was arrested on 2.10.2010 and in the meanwhile, process under Section 87, Cr.P.C. Stood completed against him.
5. A person who does not believe in the process and commandment of law exposes himself to a position of deprivation and disadvantageousness. It has been held time and again that a fugitive from law loses some of his normal rights not only under the substantive law but also under the procedural law. I do not find any circumstance warranting further probe into the guilt of the petitioner, who is named in the F.I.R. With the allegation to have dishonestly issued a cheque of 20,00,000/- (two millions),to the complainant knowingly that it would be dishonoured" on presentation and this is what exactly happened Subsequent thereto, the instant petition is dismissed in limine, being destitute of merits.