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 2, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Daleep Singh @ Babbu vs State Of Punjab on 15 March, 2021

Author: Gurvinder Singh Gill

Bench: Gurvinder Singh Gill

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



                                                         CRM-M-37609-2020 (O&M)
                                                         Date of Decision:-15.3.2021



     Daleep Singh @ Babbu                                              ... Petitioner

                                            Versus

     State of Punjab                                                  ... Respondent



     CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL



     Present:-    Mr. Kuldip Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

                  Mr. Ajay Pal Singh Gill, DAG, Punjab,
                  assisted by ASI Paramjit Singh.

                  (proceedings conducted through video conferencing)

                  *****

     GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J.(Oral)

1. The petitioner has approached this Court seeking grant of anticipatory bail in respect of a case registered vide FIR No.180 dated 24.8.2020 at Police Station Vairo Ke, District Fazilka under Section 61(1) of Punjab Excise Act, 1914.

2. The case of the prosecution is that pursuant to receipt of a secret information against the petitioner to the effect that he is in habit of dealing in illicit liquor, a raid was conducted at his house and 100 liters of 'lahan' was recovered. However, the accused is stated to have fled away from the spot.

1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 15-03-2021 23:48:56 ::: (2) CRM-M-37609-2020 (O&M)

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case and that no sanctity can be attached to the alleged recovery of 'lahan' from the house of the petitioner.

4. Opposing the petition, learned State counsel has submitted that since huge quantity of 'lahan' was recovered pursuant to receipt of secret information, no case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out. Learned State counsel has, however, informed that pursuant to interim directions issued by this Court, the petitioner has since joined investigation and is not required for any custodial interrogation and that he is not stated to be involved in any other case.

5. I have considered rival submissions addressed before this Court.

6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and while noticing that the petitioner was not apprehended at the spot and has since joined investigation and is not required for any custodial interrogation, the petition is accepted and the interim directions issued by this Court vide order dated 16.11.2020 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.





     15.3.2021                                            ( Gurvinder Singh Gill )
     pankaj                                                     Judge

     Whether reasoned/speaking         Yes / No

     Whether reportable                Yes / No




                                         2 of 2
                      ::: Downloaded on - 15-03-2021 23:48:56 :::