Ranjit Singh v. State Of Punjab

-1CRM-M-31370 of 2020 203IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-31370 of 2020 Date of decision: 14.12.2020 Ranjit Singh ......Petitioner vs.

State of Punjab ......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL

Present:

Mr. Deepinder Brar, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Sidakmeet Singh Sandhu, AAG, Punjab.

DEEPAK SIBAL, J. (ORAL) Case taken up through video conferencing.

Through the present petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. the petitioner seeks the grant of anticipatory bail in FIR No.121 dated 08.09.2020 registered under Sections 61 and 78 of the Excise Act, 1914, at Police Station Raman, Bathinda.

Briefly stated, the case of the prosecution is that three persons were stopped by the police out of whom two which included the petitioner ran away and from the third person, who was arrested, 120 bottles of liquor were recovered.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case due to political rivalry; no recovery has been effected from the person of the petitioner; the case of the prosecution is highly improbable that at the time of alleged recovery, in the presence of so many policemen, the petitioner fled from the spot and RAVINDER SINGH 2020.12.17 19:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

-2CRM-M-31370 of 2020 that under the interim orders passed by this Court the petitioner has not only joined the investigation but has also fully co-operated with the investigating agency.

Learned State counsel on instructions of ASI Karamjit Singh admits to the fact that the petitioner has joined the investigation; he has co-operated with the investigating agency and that his custodial interrogation is not required.

After considering the totality of the above facts especially the statement made by the learned State counsel that the petitioner has joined the investigation and his custodial interrogation is not required, the order of this Court dated 13.10.2020 granting ad-interim anticipatory bail to the petitioner is made absolute.

Nothing observed herein-above shall be considered to be an expression of opinion by this Court on the merits of the case. (Deepak Sibal) December 14, 2020 Judge R.S.

Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No RAVINDER SINGH 2020.12.17 19:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document