Allowed

Suraj Sharma v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC21 Oct 2024CRM-M/18756/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail sought in NDPS FIR for heroin recovery based on co-accused's disclosure. Petitioner joined investigation during interim bail and was not required for custodial interrogation; interim bail made absolute subject to Section 438(2) conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted; interim bail order dated 19.4.2024 made absolute subject to joining investigation and Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. conditions.

Suraj Sharma Vs State of Haryana — Narcotics (NDPS) | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

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

¶2

CRM-M-18756-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision:-21.10.2024

Suraj Sharma

… Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana

... Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL

¶9

Present:Mr. Davinder Pal Soni Joura, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶10

Mr. Munish Sharma, DAG, Haryana, assisted by ASI Bhupender Singh.

¶11

*****

¶12

FIR No.	Dated	Police Stat	ion	Section/s
0095	20.3.2024	Civil Lines	Sirsa,	21(B), 61/85 of Narcotic Drugs
		District	Sirsa,	and Psychotropic Substances
		Haryana		Act, 1985

¶13

GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J . (Oral)

¶14

The instant petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking grant of anticipatory bail in respect of aforementioned FIR.

¶15

At the time of issuance of notice of motion, the following order was passed on 19.4.2024:

¶16

“The petitioner seeks grant of anticipatory bail in respect of a case registered against him vide FIR No. 0095, dated 20.03.2024, Police Station Civil Line Sirsa, District Sirsa, under Sections 21(B), 61/85 of NDPS Act.

¶17

It is the case of prosecution that one Davinder Singh was apprehended by the police whose search yielded recovery of 6.65 grams of ‘Heroin’. It is further the case of prosecution that during

¶18

Pankaj Kakkar 2024.10.21 17:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶19

CRM-M-18756-2024 (O&M)

¶20

( 2 )

¶21

the course of interrogation he disclosed that he had procured the said contraband from the petitioner.

¶22

Learned counsel submits that he has falsely been implicated in the present cases on the basis of an alleged disclosure statement of coaccused which would hardly carry any evidentiary value. Learned counsel submits that the quantity of contraband allegedly recovered from the petitioner is slightly more than small quantity and that the petitioner has a clean record.

¶23

Notice of motion for 21.10.2024.

¶24

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 Arresting/Investigating Officer and shall abide by the conditions as provided under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C.”

¶25

Learned State counsel, upon instructions from the ASI Bhupender Singh, has informed that pursuant to interim directions, the petitioner has since joined investigation and he is not required for any custodial interrogation.

¶26

Having regard to the aforestated position, wherein the petitioner is stated to have joined investigation and is not required for any custodial interrogation, the instant petition is accepted and the interim directions issued by this Court vide order dated 19.4.2024 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.

¶27

21.10.2024 ( Gurvinder Singh Gill ) Pankaj Judge Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No

¶28

Pankaj Kakkar 2024.10.21 17:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

Suraj Sharma v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suraj Sharma 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

Sikander @ Rinku Vs State of Punjab

Guppreet Kaur and Another Vs State of Punjab and Others

Sukhwinder Singh Alias Ladi Vs State of Punjab

Mandeep Singh Alias Dharu Vs State of Punjab

Gurwinder Singh Alias Gobind Alias Goga Vs State of Punjab

Vishal Vs State of Haryana