Satwinder Singh v. State Of Punjab

THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision-16.05.2022 Satwinder Singh

...Petitioner

Vs.

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ BAJAJ

Present:

Mr. Aman Dhir, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Sandeep Singh Deol, DAG, Punjab.

*** MANOJ BAJAJ, J. (Oral) Petitioner has approached this Court under Section 438 Code of Criminal Procedure to seek anticipatory bail in case FIR No.155 dated 25.08.2021 under Section 61 of The Punjab Excise Act, 1914 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 registered at Police Station Sangat, District Bathinda, who apprehends his arrest at the hands of Police. On 14.09.2021, this Court had passed the following order:- "Case is being taken up for hearing through Video Conferencing due to Covid-19 pandemic.

Prayer in the petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.155 dated 25.08.2021 registered under Sections 61, Punjab Excise Act, 1914 at Police Station Sangat, District Bathinda.

-2Learned counsel contends that the petitioner has been implicated in a false case and that although the vehicle from which recovery of 1680 bottles of liquor was made, belongs to him, yet the petitioner was not present at the time the liquor was recovered nor was any independent person joined as a witness.

Notice of motion.

Mr. Hittan Nehra, Additional AG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the State of Punjab and requests for an adjournment to file reply.

Adjourned to 22.09.2021.

Thereafter, on 01.11.2021, this Court had passed the following order:- "Heard.

Adjourned to 09.02.2022.

Meanwhile, the petitioner shall join the investigation and would come present as and when called for and in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be admitted to interim bail on his furnishing personal and surety bonds to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner shall also abide by the conditions as specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C."

Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that in compliance of the above order, the petitioner associated himself in the investigation and cooperated during interrogation.

Learned State counsel who is instructed by ASI Iqbal Singh states that indeed the petitioner has joined the investigation and is not

-3required for custodial interrogation for the time being. Considering above, the petition is allowed and the interim bail granted by this Court vide order dated 01.11.2021 is made absolute. (MANOJ BAJAJ) JUDGE 16.05.2022 geeta Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes No Whether Reportable :

Yes No