Ganga Ram v. State Of Haryana

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH DECIDED ON : 21.04.2025 GANGA RAM ......PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF HARYANA ......RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

Present:

Mr. Raghav Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Kanwar Sanjiv Kumar, AAG, Haryana.

**** SANJAY VASHISTH, J.

1.

Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438 Cr.P.C.), is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder:- Name of Petitioner (s) FIR No. Date Section(s) Police Station District Ganga Ram, aged 39 years 10.01.2023 15 of NDPS Act, (29-6185 of NDPS Act added later on) Mullana Ambala 2.

On 20.02.2025, following order was passed:-

-2- "Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438 Cr.P.C.), is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder:- Name of Petitioner (s) FIR No.

Date Section(s) Police Station District Ganga Ram, aged 39 years 10.01.2023 15 of NDPS Mullana Ambala Act, (29-6185 of NDPS Act added later on) 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends as following:

(i) From Main/co-accused Jaswinder Kumar, recovery of 25.700 kg of poppy-husk, while he was sitting on the driving seat of the truck bearing registration No.HR58C-1414. The said truck is owned by one Madhu Setia Pani Lakesh Kumar, resident of H.No.45 B, Model Town, Jagadhari, Distt. Yamuna Nagar.

(ii) Petitioner is not named in the FIR, rather, his name surfaced subsequently only and that too through second disclosure statement.

(iii) Allegation against the petitioner is that he is supplier of the contraband to main accused - Jaswinder Kumar, whose name was disclosed in the secret information.

(iv) Had there been any substance in the allegation, which is developed subsequent to the registration of the FIR, there could be a clue in the secret information also, as to who is the supplier of the contraband to the coaccused Jaswinder Kumar.

-3- (v) The quantity recovered, is intermediate and solely on the basis of disclosure statement or alleged call details, the allegations cannot be confirmed at this stage.

(vi) Petitioner is not involved in any other case of similar nature.

Thus, learned counsel prays for grant of concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the present case. 3.

Notice of motion.

4.

On advance notice, learned State counsel puts in appearance on behalf of the respondent - State, and seeks some time to respond to the submissions addressed by learned counsel opposite, after seeking instructions, and, in case of necessity, to file status report.

5.

Adjourned to 21.04.2025.

6.

In the meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to join the investigation as and when required to do so by the Investigating Agency. In the event of his arrest, the petitioner shall be released on ad-interim bail, subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. The petitioner shall also be abide by all the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.).

7.

Besides, the petitioner would submit/surrender his passport before the Arresting Officer and an undertaking on oath that in case of leaving the Country, he would seek prior permission from the Investigating Agency/concerned Court."

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that in compliance of the order dated 20.02.2025, passed by this Court, the

-4petitioner has joined the investigation and has fully co-operated. He further submits that for no meaningful purpose, custodial interrogation is required, therefore, prays for confirmation of the interim bail order dated 20.02.2025.

4.

On the other hand, learned State counsel has filed status report dated 14.04.2025 along with Annexures R-1 to R-3 in the Court today and the same is taken on record. He, on instructions from ASI Pankaj, confirms the factum of joining of investigation by the petitioner and also accepts the submission that the petitioner has fully cooperated during the investigation. Further argues that though, petitioner has joined the investigation, but has not furnished the particulars of the main supplier, from whom he had received the contraband. However, confirms that petitioner is not involved in any other similar activity. 5.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

6.

Considering the plea addressed from both sides, going through the petition and the status report, this Court finds that prosecution has to establish involvement of the petitioner through unimpeachable evidence during the course of trial. As of now, only on the basis of disclosure statement, the petitioner cannot be subjected to custodial interrogation for forcing him to disclose the name of the person, as desired by the prosecution agency. Accordingly, present petition is allowed and ad-interim order dated 20.02.2025, passed by this Court is hereby made absolute.

-5However, petitioner shall continue to join the investigation as and when required to do so and abide by all the terms and conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023. 7.

Accordingly, petition stands disposed of.

(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE April 21, 2025 anju Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No