High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/61988/2018allowed

Satish Kumar @Dolu v. State Of Haryana

2019-03-19Mr. Justice Arvind Singh Sangwan2 pages

CRM-M No.61988 of 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.61988 of 2018 Decided on: 19.03.2019 Satish Kumar @ Dholu ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN Present :

Mr. Manjeet Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Naveen Sheoran, DAG, Haryana.

ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN, J. (Oral) The petitioner prays for grant of anticipatory bail in FIR No.289 dated 09.06.2018, registered under Sections 20 and 61 of the NDPS Act at Police Station Barwala, District Hisar. The operative part of the order dated 24.12.2018, vide which interim anticipatory bail has been granted to the petitioner, is reproduced as under:- "....Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is not named in the FIR. His name has been involved in the case only on the basis of the alleged disclosure statement of the co-accused, who is stated to have made a statement to the police, that he had received ganja recovered from him from the present petitioner. Counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner does not even know the co-accused, who is alleged to have made a disclosure statement against the petitioner. It is further contended that there is no other case against the MOHD YAKUB 2019.03.19 16:47 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh

CRM-M No.61988 of 2018 petitioner.

On the other hand, learned State counsel submits that the name of the petitioner has surfaced during the process of the investigation. The petitioner is alleged to be the supplier of the contraband and his custodial interrogation is necessary.

The case is adjourned to 19.03.2019....."

Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that, in pursuance to the order dated 24.12.2018, the petitioner has appeared before the Investigating Officer and has joined the investigation. Counsel for the State, on instructions from SI Amar Singh, has not disputed the aforesaid fact and submits that the petitioner is no more required for further investigation.

In view of the above, this petition is allowed and the interim bail granted to the petitioner vide order dated 24.12.2018 is made absolute subject to the conditions envisaged under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

(ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN) JUDGE 19.03.2019 yakub Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No MOHD YAKUB 2019.03.19 16:47 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh