Gurdeep Singh v. State Of Punjab

CRM-M- 22099-2021 --1--

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-22099-2021 Date of Decision: 03.06.2021 GURDEEP SINGH ....PETITIONER

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB ....RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANT PARKASH Present : Mr. Maninderjit Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner.

**** SANT PARKASH J.(Oral) (The aforesaid presence is being recorded through video conferencing since the proceedings are being conducted in virtual court) The concession of anticipatory bail has been sought by the petitioner through instant petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C., in case, FIR No.0071, dated 28.04.2021, under Sections 18/61 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Police Station Bhawanigarh, District Sangrur.

As per the prosecution case, on 28.04.2021, co-accused Rohit Kumar was detained and 250 grams of opium was recovered from his possession. The allegations against the present petitioner is that he had supplied the contraband to the co-accused and this fact has been cropped up in the disclosure statement of Rohit Kumar. Notice of motion.

Mr. Bhupender Beniwal, AAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. Copy of the paper book has already been SONIKA 2021.06.03 15:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CRM-M- 22099-2021 --2-- supplied to learned State counsel.

The factual aspect is not disputed by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State. He further submits that no recovery has been effected from the present petitioner and he is no more required for custodial interrogation.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the fact no recovery has been effected from the present petitioner and his custodial interrogation is not at all required, the concession of anticipatory bail is granted to him, subject to the following conditions, as envisaged under section 438(2) Cr.P.C:- (i) that the petitioner shall make himself/herself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

(ii) that the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

(iii) that the petitioner shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.

(iv) that the petitioners shall surrender his/her passports, if any, before the concerned Chief Judicial Magistrate. (SANT PARKASH) 03.06.2021 JUDGE sonika whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No whether reportable:

Yes/No SONIKA 2021.06.03 15:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh