Punjab-Haryana High Court
Surinder Kumar vs State Of Punjab on 13 December, 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
(1) CRM M-36058 of 2012.
Date of Decision: 13.12.2012.
Surinder Kumar
.... Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab .... Respondent
(2) CRM M-36568 of 2012.
Date of Decision: 13.12.2012. Pardeep Goyal .... Petitioner Versus State of Punjab .... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAWAB SINGH Present: Mr. P.S. Ahluwalia, Advocate and Ms. Puja Chopra, Advocate for the petitioners.
Ms. Rajni Gupta, Addl. A.G., Punjab assisted by Mr. Sukhamrit Singh, Inspector/SHO. NAWAB SINGH.J (ORAL) This order disposes of aforementioned two applications for anticipatory bail filed in case bearing FIR No.297 st dated July 1 , 2009 under Sections 420 and 120-B IPC and Section 7 of Essential Commodities Act, Police Station Kotwali, District Patiala.
th On November 17 2012 following order was passed in the application filed Surinder Kumar: -
"xxxx st On July 1 , 2009 Bakshish Singh, Sub-Inspector received secret information that Mandeep Singh used to sell wheat meant to supply to poor persons in connivance with Pardeep Goyal, Commission Agent and officials of PUNSUP at CRM M-36058 of 2012. (2) his shop in Patiala. A raid was conducted, wheat was recovered from the possession of Mandeep Singh. He was arrested. Later on, he was found innocent. Pardeep Goyal from whom Mandeep Singh had purchased wheat was also found innocent. No officer of PUNSUP was challaned. The petitioner, who is owner of a fair shop in Patiala, was associated in investigation. He disclosed that he was ill and the shop was being run by his manager Joginder Sharma. The Police arrested Joginder Sharma.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that Joginder Sharma filed petition before this Court bearing CRM M-30285 of 2010 which was th disposed of by order dated July 18 , 2012 on the short ground that he was also found innocent by the investigating agency.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that now, the investigating agency after exonerating Mandeep Singh, Pardeep Goyal and the officials of PUNSUP wants to arrest the petitioner after three years whereas he was not at all concerned with the wheat in question.
Notice of motion for 13.12.2012. Meanwhile, in the event of arrest, the petitioner (Surinder Kumar) shall be released on bail by Arresting Officer to his satisfaction. Petitioner shall abide by the conditions laid down under Section 438 (2) (i) (ii) and (iii) Cr.PC. xxxx"
Learned State Counsel has stated that Surinder Kumar has joined the investigation and is not required for custodial interrogation.
th In view of this, order dated November 17 2012 CRM M-36058 of 2012. (3) stands confirmed.
As regards Pardeep Goyal, it has been stated by the investigator that he is not required for custodial interrogation.
In view of this, it is ordered that in the event of arrest, Pardeep Goyal-petitioner shall be released on bail by Arresting Officer to his satisfaction. Petitioner shall abide by the conditions laid down under Section 438 (2) (i) (ii) and (iii) Cr.PC.
13.12.2012 (NAWAB SINGH) SN JUDGE