Satwinder Singh @ Maula v. The State Of Punjab

In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana At Chandigarh CRM-M-52710-2019 (O&M) Date of Decision:-11.1.2022 Satwinder Singh @ Maula ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL Present:- Mr. Sanjeev K. Virk, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. C.L. Pawar, Sr. DAG, Punjab, assisted by ASI Davinder Dass.

(proceedings conducted through video conferencing) ***** GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J.(Oral) 1.

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking grant of anticipatory bail in respect of a case registered vide FIR No.133 dated 12.10.2019 at Police Station Sherpur, District Sangrur under Sections 61/1/14 of Punjab Excise Act, 1914.

2.

As per the case of prosecution, on 12.10.2019 when a police party had laid barricading and was present at Ramnagar Channa Road, then a car bearing registration No.DL-1-CL-5161 was intercepted. The driver of the car disclosed his name as Vijay Kumar. The search of the car led to recovery of 120 bottles of country made liquor for which the said Vijay Kumar could not produce any licence. Upon interrogation said Vijay Kumar disclosed that his PANKAJ KAKKAR 2022.01.11 17:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

( 2 ) CRM-M-52710-2019 (O&M) friend Maula had handed over the said liquor to him for the purpose of delivering it to Parwinder Singh @ Gaggi.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was never arrested at the spot and has been nominated as an accused on the basis of alleged disclosure statement made by co-accused Vijay Kumar, which would not carry any evidentiary value.

4.

Opposing the petition, learned State counsel has submitted that since the name of the petitioner was disclosed immediately when the co-accused Vijay Kumar was apprehended, no case for grant of bail is made out. Learned State counsel has, however, informed that pursuant to interim directions the petitioner has joined investigation and is not required for any custodial interrogation.

5.

Having regard to the aforesaid position, wherein the petitioner is stated to have joined investigation and is not required for any custodial interrogation, the petition is accepted and the interim directions issued by this Court vide order dated 11.12.2019 are hereby made absolute, subject to the condition that the petitioner shall join investigation as and when called upon to do so and cooperate with the Investigating Officer and shall also abide by the conditions as provided under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. 11.1.2022 ( Gurvinder Singh Gill ) pankaj Judge Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No PANKAJ KAKKAR 2022.01.11 17:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document