High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/16245/2018allowed

Mohd Razak v. State Of Punjab

2018-07-17Mr. Justice Arvind Singh Sangwan2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM No.M-16245 of 2018 (O&M) Date of Decision: July 17, 2018 Mohamad Razak

...Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH

Present:

Mr.Akaant Kumar Mittal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr.Ramandeep Sandhu, Sr. DAG, Punjab for the respondent-State.

**** INDERJIT SINGH, J.

Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.10 dated 28.01.2015 under Section 22 of the NDPS Act, registered at Police Station Shambu, District Patiala. Notice of motion was issued. Learned State counsel appeared and contested the petition.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record. From the record, I find that the petitioner was already released on regular bail. He absented from the Court proceedings on 27.11.2017. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that petitioner mistook the date as correct date has not been informed by his counsel. In compliance of the Vineet Gulati 2018.07.19 14:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CRM No.M-16245 of 2018 -2order dated 01.05.2018 passed by this Court, the petitioner has appeared before the trial Court and has been released on interim bail. The petitioner has already been released on interim bail and is not required for custodial interrogation. No useful purpose will be served by sending the petitioner to custody.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and without discussing the facts of the case in minute details and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case, where the petitioner is entitled to benefit of anticipatory bail. Therefore, the present petition is accepted and the order dated 01.05.2018 granting interim bail to the petitioner, is made absolute.

However, nothing stated above, shall constitute my opinion on merits of the case.

July 17, 2018 (INDERJIT SINGH) Vgulati JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No Vineet Gulati 2018.07.19 14:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh