Gurdial Singh v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Decided on: 03.07.2025 Gurdial Singh

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

Present:

Mr. G.S. Nahel, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Jasdev Singh Thind, DAG, Punjab.

**** ANOOP CHITKARA, J.

FIR No.

Dated Police Station Sections 16.05.2025 Sadar Sangrur, 61/1/14 of Punjab Excise Act District Sangrur 1.

The petitioner apprehending arrest in the FIR captioned above has come up before this Court under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS], seeking anticipatory bail.

2.

In paragraph 16 of the bail petition, the accused declares that he has no criminal antecedents.

3.

The facts and allegations are taken from the reply filed by the State. On 16.05.2025 based on secret information, the Police seized 40 litres of lahan from the yard of Gurdial Singh (present petitioner). The Investigator claims to have complied with all the statutory requirements of the BNSS, 2023. 4.

The petitioner approached the Sessions Court for anticipatory bail, which was denied.

5.

The petitioner's counsel prays for bail and submits that he would not repeat the offence and have no objection if this Court imposes any stringent conditions while granting bail. He further contends that pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and their family and recovery of Lahan has already been affected.

6.

The State's counsel opposes bail and refers to the reply. 7.

It would be appropriate to refer to the following portions of the reply, which read as follows:

"THE ROLE OF THE PETITIONER.

The present FIR was registered against the petitioner by name on the basis of secret information received by H.C. Bhinder Singh, P.S. Sadar Sangrur and in pursuance of the secret information, the said H.C. raided the yard of the outer house of petitioner, who on seeing the police vehicle, slipped away, he was identified by Sukhwinder Singh, eye witness. Despite chasing he succeeded in fleeing away, so he could not arrested. During the search of the yard of the outer house of petitioner two cans containing 20/20 liter lahan, were recovered lying in the room of chaff in the yard. So, a specific role is attributed to the petitioner in the commission of present offence." REASONING:

8.

Considering the undertaking given by the petitioner, this Court is granting one opportunity to the petitioner to course correct. 9.

Recovery of lahan has already been affected, as such, no purpose would be served by sending the petitioner in custodial interrogation. Pre-trial incarceration should not be a replica of post-conviction sentencing. The evidence might be prima facie sufficient to launch prosecution or to frame charges, but this Court is not considering the evidence at that stage but is analyzing it for the stage of anticipatory bail. An analysis of the above does not justify custodial interrogation or pre-trial incarceration. 10.

Given the above, the penal provisions invoked coupled with the primafacie analysis of the nature of allegations and the other factors peculiar to this case, there would be no justifiability for custodial interrogation or the pre-trial incarceration at this stage. Without commenting on the case's merits, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, and for the reasons mentioned above, the petitioner makes a case for anticipatory bail.

11.

Given above, provided the petitioner is not required in any other case, the petitioner shall be released on bail in the FIR captioned above subject to furnishing bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, and if the matter is before a Court, then the

concerned Court and due to unavailability before any nearest Ilaqa Magistrate/duty Magistrate. Before accepting the surety, the concerned Officer/Court must be satisfied that if the accused fails to appear, such surety can produce the accused. 12.

While furnishing a personal bond, the petitioner shall mention the following personal identification details:

1.

AADHAR number 2.

Passport number (If available) and when the attesting officer/court considers it appropriate or considers the accused a flight risk.

3.

Mobile number (If available) 4.

E-Mail id (If available) 13.

The petitioner is directed to join the investigation within seven days of uploading this order on the official webpage of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana and as and when called by the Investigator. The petitioner shall be in deemed custody for Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872/ Section 23 of BSA, 2023. The petitioner shall join the investigation as and when called by the Investigating Officer or any Superior Officer and shall cooperate with the investigation at all further stages as required. In the event of failure to do so, the prosecution will be open to seeking cancellation of the bail. During the investigation, the petitioner shall not be subjected to third-degree, indecent language, inhuman treatment, etc.

14.

In case the Investigator/Officer-In-Charge of the concerned Police Station arraigns another section of any penal offense in this FIR, and if the new section prescribes a maximum sentence that is not greater than the sections mentioned above, then this bail order shall be deemed to have also been passed for the newly added section(s). However, suppose the newly inserted sections prescribe a sentence exceeding the maximum sentence prescribed in the sections mentioned above; then, in that case, the Investigator/Officer-In-Charge shall give the petitioner notice of a minimum of seven days, providing an opportunity to avail the remedies available in law. 15.

This bail is conditional, and the foundational condition is that if the petitioner indulges in any non-bailable offense, the State shall file an application for cancellation of this bail before the Sessions Court, which shall have the liberty to cancel this bail. 16.

Any observation made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments. 17.

A certified copy of this order would not be needed for furnishing bonds, and any Advocate for the Petitioner can download this order along with case status from the official web page of this Court and attest it to be a true copy. If the attesting officer wants

to verify its authenticity, such an officer can also verify its authenticity and may download and use the downloaded copy for attesting bonds. 18.

Petition allowed in terms mentioned above. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 03.07.2025 anju rani Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable:

No.