Allowed

Surjit Singh @ Pappu v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC9 May 2012CRM-M/11739/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court accepted the petitioner's anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. made in an FIR under Section 15 NDPS Act. The court made the interim bail order absolute without expressing an opinion on the merits of the criminal charges.

What did the court decide?

The anticipatory bail application is accepted and the interim bail order made under a notice of motion is declared absolute subject to compliance of conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

Surjit Singh @ Pappu Vs State of Punjab — Narcotics (NDPS) | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

CRM No.M-11739 of 2012

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Crl. Misc. No. M- 11739 of 2012(O&M) Date of Decision: May 9, 2012.

Surjit Singh @Pappu.

...... PETITIONER(s)

Versus

State of Punjab.

...... RESPONDENT (s)

¶10

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA

¶11

Present: Mr. Vivek Goel, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr. Palwinder Singh, Sr.DAG, Punjab.

¶13

¶14

RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral)

¶15

The present petition has been filed for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure in FIR no. 18 dated 29.02.2012, under Section 15 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, registered at police station Bilga, District Jalandhar.

¶16

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record including the impugned order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalandhar dismissing anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of the petitioner.

¶17

CRM No.M-11739 of 2012

¶18

¶19

This Court while issuing notice of motion on 25.04.2012 passed

¶20

the following order:-

¶21

“Crl.M.No.23926 of 2012

¶22

Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions Crl.M.No.M-11739 of 2012

¶23

Contends that it was not possible for the petitioner to run during day time in the presence of so many police officials who were also having a government vehicle. It is further submitted that moreover alleged recovery is only 8 kg. of poppy husk, which is non-commercial and which has already been effected. It is also contended that he is ready to join the investigation and face trial.

¶24

Notice of motion to Advocate General, Punjab, for 9.5.2012.

¶25

However, in the meantime, petitioner is directed to join the investigation and in case he is arrested, he shall be released on interim bail by the Arresting Officer to his satisfaction subject to compliance of conditions specified under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C.”

¶26

It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has already joined the investigation pursuant to said order dated 25.04.2012.

¶27

It has also been stated by learned counsel for the State that petitioner has joined the investigation and that he is no more required for any custodial interrogation.

¶28

There are no allegations on behalf of the State that petitioner is likely to abscond or that he is likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts in the Court, if released on bail.

¶29

CRM No.M-11739 of 2012

¶30

¶31

Hence, in view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of Surjit Singh @Pappu is accepted and order dated 25.04.2012 granting interim bail in favour of the petitioner is, hereby, made absolute subject to compliance of conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

¶32

The present petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶33

May 9, 2012. ‘om’

¶34

( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) JUDGE

Surjit Singh @ Pappu v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surjit Singh @ Pappu v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nirmal Kumar @ Sabhu Vs State of Punjab

Vikramjit Singh Vs State of Punjab

Amrik Singh Vs State of Haryana

Vijay Kumar Vs State of Haryana

Bashir Vs State of Haryana

Bikkar Singh Vs Sho, P.S. Sadar Faridkot