Yudhveer Singh @ Joda v. State Of Punjab And Others


 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-57152-2023 Date of decision : 06.02.2024 YUDHVEER SINGH @ JODA ....Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN Present :

Ms. Kamaldeep Kaur, Advocate for Mr. G.S. Sandhu, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Iqbal S. Mann, DAG, Punjab.

PANKAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL) On 17.11.2023, the following order was passed :- "Apprehending his arrest in FIR No.244 dated 13.08.2023, registered under Section 21 of the NDPS Act at Police Station Special V Task Force Phase-4, SAS Nagar, Mohali, District Wing, Punjab, petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail. Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia submits that one Satpal Singh @ Satta was apprehended in possession of 60 grams of heroin. He nominated one Lovepreet Singh @ Lavu and it is in the disclosure made by Loverpreet Singh @ Lavu that the present petitioner has been nominated as the ultimate source of the contraband. He further relies upon dictum of law laid down in Tofan Singh Vs. State of Tamil Nadu, (2021) 4 SCC 1 to contend that statement suffered by co-accused under Section 67 of the NDPS Act will be a weak piece of evidence.

Notice of motion for 06.02.2024.

On the asking of the Court, Mr. Tarun Aggarwal, Sr. DAG, Punjab appears and accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State.

In the meantime, in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on interim bail subject to his furnishing personal and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/ Investigating Officer. As and when called, the petitioner shall join the investigation. He shall abide by the conditions enumerated under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C." Deepak Kumar 2024.02.07 10:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-57152-2023 -22024:PHHC:016400 2.

Today, Ld. State Counsel submits that the petitioner has already joined investigation and is no more required for custodial interrogation. 3.

Without commenting on the merits of the case and in view of the aforesaid fact, order dated 17.11.2023 is made absolute, subject to the conditions as enumerated under Sections 438(2) Cr.P.C. 4.

This order should not be treated as "blanket" order. It will not be read granting the petitioner indefinite protection from arrest. It shall be confined to the FIR mentioned ibid and will not operate in respect of any other incident that involves commission of an offence. 5.

This order does not in any manner limit or restrict the rights or duties of the police or investigating agency to investigate into the charges against the petitioner.

6.

The petitioner shall be deemed to be in custody for the purpose of Section 27 of the Evidence Act in regard to a discovery of facts made in pursuance of information supplied by the petitioner in case the occasion arises.

7.

It will be open to the police or the investigating agency to move this Court for a direction under Section 439(2) Cr.P.C. to arrest the accused, in the event of violation of any term, such as absconding, noncooperating during investigation, evasion, intimidation or inducement to witnesses with a view to influence outcome of the investigation or trial. 8.

Petition stands disposed off accordingly.

February 06, 2024 (Pankaj Jain) Dpr Judge Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No Deepak Kumar 2024.02.07 10:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document