Allowed

Rajinder Kumar v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC24 Nov 2020CRM-M/17894/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana considered a petition for anticipatory bail in an NDPS case. The Court accepted the petition and made interim directions absolute, observing the petitioner had joined investigation, making custodial interrogation unnecessary while adhering to Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. conditions.

What did the court decide?

Interim directions for anticipatory bail made absolute; petitioner to appear and join investigation as called upon.

Rajinder Kumar Vs State of Haryana — Narcotics (NDPS) | Punjab & Haryana HC (2020)

¶1

In The High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana At Chandigarh

¶2

CRM-M-17894-2020 (O&M) Date of Decision:- 24.11.2020

¶3

Rajinder Kumar … Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana

... Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL

¶8

Present:Mr. Amit Choudhary, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Sheenu Sura, DAG Haryana.

¶9

(Proceedings conducted through video conferencing)

¶10

¶11

GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J . (Oral)

¶12

The petitioner seeks grant of anticipatory bail in a case registered vide FIR No.242, dated 5.6.2020, Police Station City Tohana, District Fatehabad, under Section 22(c) of NDPS Act.

¶13

At the time of issuance of notice of motion, the following order was passed :-

¶14

“The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that he was never arrested at the spot and that it is one Vinod and Kuldeep @ Khandu, who were apprehended while riding on a motorcycle and that it was from the possession of pillion rider Kuldeep @ Khandu that 2400 tablets of 'Tramadol Hydrochloride' total weighing 960 grams were recovered. It has been

¶15

MOHAN SINGH 2020.11.24 18:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶16

- 2 - CRM-M-17894-2020 (O&M)

¶17

submitted that it is on the basis of disclosure statement that the petitioner has been nominated as an accused. Notice of motion for 24.11.2020.

¶18

Meanwhile, in the event of arrest, the petitioner be released on interim bail subject to his furnishing personal bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. However, the petitioner shall join the 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.”

¶19

It has been informed by learned State counsel that pursuant to interim dirctions, the petitioner has since joined investigation.

¶20

Having regard to the fact that the petitioner has been nominated as an accused on the basis of disclosure statement and that he has already joined investigation, his custodial interrogation is not warranted. The petition, as such is accepted and the interim directions issued vide order dated 14.7.2020 are hereby made absolute subject to the condition that the petitioner shall appear and join investigation as and when called upon to do so and cooperate with the Investigating Officer and shall abide by the conditions as provided under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C.

¶21

November 24, 2020 (GURVINDER SINGH GILL) mohan JUDGE Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No

¶22

MOHAN SINGH 2020.11.24 18:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Rajinder Kumar v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajinder Kumar v. State of Haryana

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

Raja Vs State of Haryana

Rajan Verma Vs State of Punjab

Sunita Rani Vs State of Punjab

Iqbal Singh Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Farukh Vs State of Haryana

Mehtab Hassan Vs State of Haryana