Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Ranjit Singh @ Raju vs State Of Punjab on 6 January, 2020

Author: Arvind Singh Sangwan

Bench: Arvind Singh Sangwan

203
      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                     CHANDIGARH

                                              CRM-M No.53039 of 2019
                                             Date of decision: 06.01.2020

Ranjit Singh @ Raju
                                                               ....Petitioner
                                   Versus
State of Punjab
                                                             ....Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN

Present:     Mr. Naveen Sharma, Advocate
             for the petitioner.

             Mr. Joginder Pal Ratra, DAG, Punjab.

ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN J. (Oral)

Prayer in this petition is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No. 54 dated 21.04.2016 registered under Section 15 of the NDPS Act at Police Station Maur, District Bathinda.

Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was initially granted the concession of interim regular bail vide order dated 05.08.2016 passed in CRM-M No.24899 of 2016. It is further submitted that 02 of the co-accused namely Rajinder Singh @ Babbi and Gulzar Singh have been granted the concession of regular bail vide orders dated 19.08.2016 and 23.09.2019 passed in CRM-M Nos.27675 and 32117 of 2016, in view of the fact that the petitioner was admitted to bail vide aforesaid order dated 05.08.2016.

Counsel for the petitioner has further argued that the petitioner continued to face the trial and appeared before the trial Court for about 16 dates subsequently when it was noticed by the trial Court that the petitioner was granted interim regular bail awaiting the FSL report and he was never granted the regular bail.

1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 12-01-2020 03:29:27 ::: Counsel for the petitioner has further argued that now the trial Court noticing the aforesaid fact has directed the petitioner to surrender.

Considering the fact that the petitioner remained on interim regular bail awaiting the report of FSL, which was upto the date when the FSL report was received and also in view of the fact that based upon the said order, 02 of the co-accused have already been granted the concession of regular bail and also in view of the fact that the petitioner is facing the trial since August, 2016, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to surrender before the trial Court within a period of one week from today and the trial Court will decided his regular bail application within a period of 03 days thereafter, considering the observations made in the orders dated 19.08.2016 and 23.09.2016 vide which the regular bail was granted to 02 of the co-accused of the petitioner and also in view of the fact that the petitioner has faced the trial for a considerable long time.

Disposed of.



                                          (ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN)
                                                   JUDGE

06.01.2020
yakub



             Whether speaking/reasoned:               Yes/No

             Whether reportable:                      Yes/No




                                 2 of 2
              ::: Downloaded on - 12-01-2020 03:29:27 :::