Jatinder Masih Alias Bhoondi v. State Of Punjab
CRM-M-50045-2025 1-
!"!
#$%& '
()
$ *+ ,- ,,
!
" #
!
! $% &&& , ).
+/$ '
% ( ) !( % ! *# +,-. /0,/1/12 ) ! 1, 10 +!! 3) (!
! ! ! ,045 6
789 %! : # :
3 ! ) 2.
Status report dated 27.10.2025 filed on behalf of the respondentState is taken on record. Copy thereof, has been supplied to opposite counsel. 3.
Vide order dated 08.09.2025 passed by this Court, the petitioner was granted interim bail and was directed to join investigation. 4.
Learned State counsel, on instructions from the Investigating Officer, has submitted that the petitioner has joined investigation on 20.10.2025. Learned State counsel has submitted that he has not cooperated in the investigation as he has not given information qua the source from which the contraband had been taken by him. and it is, therefore, urged by her that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required. 5.
So far as the contention as raised by learned State counsel qua Parveen Sharma 2025.10.30 10:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CRM-M-50045-2025 2allegation of non-cooperation is concerned, this Court does not find any compelling ground to justify custodial interrogation of the petitioner due to that reason. Since the well settled proposition of law is that once an accused joined the investigation, then only because of the reason that nothing incriminating could be discovered or no recovery was got effected from him, would not mean that there is non-cooperation on the part of the accused. Reliance in this context can be placed upon the observation as made in Santosh versus State of Maharashtra (2017) 9 SCC 714 and Jugraj Singh versus State of Punjab, SLP No.9190 of 2025. The purpose of joining investigation is to make oneself available to the investigating agency and to respond to lawful queries and not to compulsorily divulge self-incriminating information.
In the instant case, the conduct of the petitioner in appearing before the Investigating Officer and responding to the investigation, satisfies the legal standard of cooperation. Keeping in view the nature of the allegations, pre-trial incarceration of the petitioner is also not required. It is also well settled that pre-trial incarceration should not be a replica of post conviction. As such, a case is made out for allowing the present petition.
; !!)%( %% /4/01/15 )) < % < %
! ! % ! 241619 ( +)
6+9 1/1- 6%) ! 2-4619 <% !9 0, 1 %& '
()
Parveen Sharma 2025.10.30 10:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document