Punjab-Haryana High Court
Som Nath vs State Of Punjab on 18 November, 2013
Author: Mehinder Singh Sullar
Bench: Mehinder Singh Sullar
CRM No.M-35321 of 2013 (O&M) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM No.M-35321 of 2013 (O&M)
Date of Decision:- 18.11.2013
Som Nath
.....Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
.....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR
Present: Mr. Mohinder Singh Nain, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Mr. R.P.S. Sidhu, Asstt. Advocate General, Punjab
for the respondent-State.
****
MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR , J.(oral) Petitioner-Som Nath son of Dharam Raj, has preferred the instant petition for the grant of anticipatory bail in a case registered against him, vide FIR No.97 dated 10.09.2013, on accusation of having committed an offence punishable under Section 420 IPC and Section 7 of The Essential Commodities Act, 1955, by the police of Police Station City Malerkotla, invoking the provisions of Section 438 Cr.P.C.
2. Notice of the petition was issued to the State.
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, going through the record with their valuable assistance and after considering the entire matter deeply, to my mind, the present petition for anticipatory bail deserves to be accepted in this context.
Kumar Naresh2013.11.22 12:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM No.M-35321 of 2013 (O&M) 2
4. During the course of preliminary hearing, the following order was passed by this Court on October 22, 2013: -
"Learned counsel, inter alia, contended that the petitioner was not apprehended while indulging any such illegal activities and only 550 liters of Kerosene was stated to have been recovered from his possession. The argument is that the entire proceedings are vitiated, in view of the ratio of law laid down by this Court in case Vijay Kumar @ Vijay Tina vs. State of Punjab, 2012(2) RCR (Criminal) 222. Moreover, nothing is to be recovered from him.
Heard.
Notice of motion be issued to the respondent, returnable for 18.11.2013.
Meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to join the investigation before the next date of hearing. In the event of his arrest, the Arresting Officer would admit him to bail on his furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds in the sum of `25,000/- to his satisfaction."
5. At the very outset, on instructions from ASI Major Singh, learned State Counsel has acknowledged the factual matrix and submitted that the petitioner has already joined the investigation. He is no longer required for further interrogation, at this stage. There is no history of his previous involvement in any other criminal case. Even, since the prosecution has not yet submitted the final police report (challan) against the accused, so, the final conclusion of trial will naturally take a long time.
6. In the light of aforesaid reasons and taking into consideration the totality of facts and circumstances, emanating from the record, as discussed here-in-above, the instant petition for anticipatory bail is accepted. The interim bail already granted to the petitioner by this Court, by virtue of order dated October 22, 2013, is hereby made absolute, Kumar Naresh 2013.11.22 12:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM No.M-35321 of 2013 (O&M) 3 subject to the compliance of the conditions, as contemplated under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
Needless to mention that, in case, the petitioner does not cooperate or join the investigation, the prosecution would be at liberty to move a petition for cancellation of his bail, in this respect.
November 18, 2013 (MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR)
naresh.k JUDGE
Kumar Naresh
2013.11.22 12:35
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Chandigarh