High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/9896/2024disposed of

Gurbaj Singh @ Baj v. State Of Punjab

2024-05-01Mr. Justice Pankaj Jain2 pages

2024:PHHC:059920

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-9896-2024 Date of decision : 01.05.2024 GURBAJ SINGH @ BAJ ....Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN Present :

Mr. Rishu Mahajan, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Tarun Aggarwal, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

PANKAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL) On 26.02.2024, the following order was passed :- "Apprehending his arrest in FIR No.317 dated 10.12.2023, registered for offences punishable under Sections 21(c)/25/27A/29 of NDPS Act, 1985 at Police Station Jandiala, Amritsar, the petitioner has preferred this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking pre-arrest bail.

Counsel for the petitioner inter alia submits that the petitioner has been nominated on the basis of disclosure made by co-accused Vijay Kumar, who has apprehended with 300 gms. of heroin. Apart from the disclosure made by Vijay Kumar, that too, to the extent that the petitioner alongwith 05 other accused are dealing in heroin in different areas, there is no incriminating evidence against the petitioner.

Petitioner has clean antecedents.

Counsel for the petitioner relies upon Tofan Singh vs. State of Tamil Nadu reported as (2021) 4 SCC 1. Notice of the motion for 01.05.2024.

In the meantime, in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on interim bail subject to his furnishing personal and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/Investigating Officer. As and when called, the petitioner shall join the investigation. He shall abide by the conditions enumerated under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C." Deepak Kumar 2024.05.02 11:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-9896-2024 -22024:PHHC:059920 2.

Today, Ld. State Counsel on instructions from ASI Nishan Singh submits that the petitioner has already joined investigation and is no more required for custodial interrogation.

Without commenting on the merits of the case and in view of the aforesaid fact, order dated 26.02.2024 is made absolute, subject to the conditions as enumerated under Sections 438(2) Cr.P.C. 4.

This order should not be treated as "blanket" order. It will not be read granting the petitioner indefinite protection from arrest. It shall be confined to the FIR mentioned ibid and will not operate in respect of any other incident that involves commission of an offence. 5.

This order does not in any manner limit or restrict the rights or duties of the police or investigating agency to investigate into the charges against the petitioner.

The petitioner shall be deemed to be in custody for the purpose of Section 27 of the Evidence Act in regard to a discovery of facts made in pursuance of information supplied by the petitioner in case the occasion arises.

It will be open to the police or the investigating agency to move this Court for a direction under Section 439(2) Cr.P.C. to arrest the accused, in the event of violation of any term, such as absconding, non-cooperating during investigation, evasion, intimidation or inducement to witnesses with a view to influence outcome of the investigation or trial. 8.

Petition stands disposed off accordingly.

May 01, 2024 (Pankaj Jain) Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No Deepak Kumar 2024.05.02 11:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document