An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. relating to an FIR under Section 21 of the NDPS Act was dismissed by the High Court, noting the petitioner's absence and lack of grounds.
The petition for grant of anticipatory bail was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Crl. Misc. No. M-17105 of 2012 (O&M) Date of decision: 09.08.2012
Sarabjit Singh
....Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARAMJEET SINGH
Present: - Mr. Liaqat Ali, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. J.S. Bhullar, AAG, Punjab.
PARAMJEET SINGH, J. (ORAL)
This is a petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.56 dated 9.6.2012 under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, registered at Police Station Sadar Maqsudan, District Jalandhar.
Petitioner did not appear before the Court. For that reason even notice to the surety was given.
In view of the above, no ground for grant of anticipatory bail is made out.
Dismissed.
(Paramjeet Singh) Judge
August 09, 2012 R.S.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in a case under Section 21 of NDPS Act.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Sarabjit Singh
State of Punjab
Paramjeet Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
