Allowed

Manjeet Singh @ Kana v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC29 Mar 2017CRM-M/10122/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed the bail petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for offences under NDPS Act and IPC. Petitioner arrested in 2015 but identity as escaped accused was not conclusively established by trial court.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on regular bail on furnishing bond and surety subject to compliance with Section 437(3) Cr.P.C. and attendance at hearings.

Manjeet Singh @ Kana Vs State of Punjab — Narcotics (NDPS) | Punjab & Haryana HC (2017)

¶1

CRM-M-10122 of 2017

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶4

CRM-M-10122 of 2017 Date of Decision: 29.03.2017

¶5

Manjeet Singh @ Kana ....Petitioner

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

State of Punjab ....Respondent

¶8

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA

¶9

Present: Mr. Imran Farooqi, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶10

¶11

SURINDER GUPTA, J.(Oral)

¶12

Present petition has been filed under Section 439 Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 14 dated 14.02.2014 registered for offences punishable under Sections 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and 412/482 of Indian Penal Code, at Police Station Bajakhana, District Faridkot.

¶13

Heard.

¶14

Notice of motion.

¶15

On asking of the court, Ms. Bhavna Gupta, DAG, Punjab, who is present in the Court accepts notice and submits that intimation by Registry informing of fixation of the petition has already been received and record of the case is available with her.

¶16

As per case of prosecution, recovery of 500 kgs. of poppy-husk was effected from Innova Car bearing registration no. CH-01-KS-1684, which was a stolen vehicle but occupants of the vehicle succeeded in running away from the spot. Both were named as Gurmit Singh and Pabhu in the FIR and also in subsequent proceedings which took place at the spot.

¶17

Jitender Kumar 2017.03.30 10:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CHANDIGARH

¶18

CRM-M-10122 of 2017 -2-

¶19

Learned State counsel submits that on the application of father of Gurmit Singh, an enquiry was conducted and it was found that Gurmit Singh was not present at the spot. The police recorded the statement of HC Kultar Sigh, who stated that on 14.02.2014 that when Innova car bearing no. CH-01-KS-1684 was apprehended, the petitioner was amongst those two persons, who had escaped from the spot. The police discharged Gurmit Singh and arrested the petitioner on 31.03.2015.

¶20

Keeping in view above facts, the identity of petitioner as the person, who escaped the police patrol party on the day Innova Car was apprehended, is a matter to be seen and determined by the trial Court at the time of final disposal.

¶21

In view of the fact that the petitioner was arrested on 31.03.2015 and is in custody since then but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, the present petition is allowed. Petitioner-Manjeet Singh @ Kana is ordered to be released on regular bail on furnishing bail bond and surety bond to the satisfaction of concerned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, subject to following terms:-

¶22

(a) The petitioner shall comply with the conditions mentioned in Section 437(3) Cr.P.C. (b) In the event of his absence on any date of hearing, the benefit of bail allowed to the petitioner shall stand withdrawn. The trial Court shall be competent to cancel his bail bond and surety bond and proceed to procure his presence in accordance with law. In that eventuality the petitioner shall have to apply for bail afresh. (c) He shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the Court.

¶23

March 29, 2017 ( SURINDER GUPTA ) jk JUDGE

¶24

Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No

¶25

Whether reportable

¶26

Yes/No

¶27

Jitender Kumar 2017.03.30 10:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CHANDIGARH

Manjeet Singh @ Kana v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manjeet Singh @ Kana 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

Tejinder Pal Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Krishan Kumar and Anr. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Rahul @ Raldu Vs State of Haryana

Simran Kaur Vs State of Punjab

Azad & Anr. Vs State of Haryana

Saurabh Shrivastav Vs State of Punjab