Lashkar Singh v. State Of Punjab

2023:PHHC:121866 CRM-M-29797-2022 (O&M)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CRM-M-29797-2022 (O&M) Date of decision: September 15, 2023 Lashkar Singh ....Petitioner versus State of Punjab ....Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA Present:- Mr. Rajdeep Singh Gill, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. Shubham Kaushik, AAG Punjab.

***** ARUN MONGA, J. (ORAL) Petition herein is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.131 dated 18.06.2022, under Sections 20, 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'NDPS Act'), registered at Police Station, Amargarh, District Malerkotla (earlier District Sangrur). 2.

Per prosecution version, on 18.06.2022, a secret information was received by SI Surjit Singh to the effect that Hardeep Singh and Sandeep Singh @ Ladda were habitual of keeping ganja/ charas in their possession for sale. It was further informed that said ganja/ charas was being supplied to them by petitioner. Thereafter, barricading was set up at the bridge of Canal in the vicinity of Village Salar by S.I Nibhai Singh and other police officials. Co-accused, namely Hardeep Singh and Sandeep Singh @ Ladda were seen coming on a Scooter. SI Nirbhai Singh signalled them to stop. Riders of the scooter tried to flee, but they were apprehended. One plastic bag was found kept between the feet of the driver of scooter. The bag was opened and 3.5 kg. charas/ ganja was recovered from it.

On asking, driver disclosed his name as Hardeep Singh while pillion rider revealed his name as Sandeep Singh @ Ladda. Both co-accused of the petitioner were arrested on the spot. Petitioner was named as accused in the FIR in question under Section 29 of NDPS Act as a supplier. As per FSL repot, Tetrahydrocannabinol and other Cannabinoids were present in the sample.

MAHAVIR SINGH 2023.09.29 15:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment

2023:PHHC:121866 CRM-M-29797-2022 (O&M) 3.

Vide order dated 21.02.2023 passed by this Court, petitioner was directed to join investigation as and when required by the investigating agency, and in the event of his arrest, he was directed to be released on interim bail. Thereafter, case was adjourned from time to time.

4.

On resumed hearing today, at the outset, learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Sohan Lal, points out that despite aforesaid directions, petitioner has not joined investigation. Learned counsel for petitioner does not controvert the aforesaid fact that notwithstanding clear direction given by this Court, petitioner did not join investigation.

5.

In the premise, the petitioner, having violated the conditions on which he was granted ad interim anticipatory bail, has disentitled himself for the grant of pre-arrest bail.

6.

Dismissed.

7.

Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (ARUN MONGA) JUDGE September 15, 2023 mahavir Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No MAHAVIR SINGH 2023.09.29 15:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment