JUDGMENT (ORAL)

Mehinder Singh Sullar, J.—Petitioner Paramjit Singh alias Kuku son of S. Sardar Singh has preferred the instant petition for the grant of anticipatory bail, in a case registered against him, vide FIR No. 73 dated 20.12.2012 (Annexure P1), for the violation of provisions of section 25(1) of the Fertilizer Control Order, 1985, punishable under section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 by the police of Police Station Daresi, District Ludhiana, invoking the provisions of section 438 Cr.PC.

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 help and after considering the entire matter deeply, to my mind, the present petition deserves to be accepted in this context.

4. During the course of preliminary hearing, a Coordinate Bench of this Court (Amol Rattan Singh, J.) passed the following order on 4.1.2013:-

“Counsel for the Petitioner contends that as per the FIR, registered under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (in short, “the Act”) at Police Station Daresi, District Ludiana (Annexure P1), the person who conducted the raid was a Sub Inspector of police and as per Clause 15 of the Punjab Light Diesel Oil and Kerosene Licensing Order, 1978, no police official below the rank of Inspector has the power of entry, search and seizure etc. He also relies upon a Judgment of this Court in the case of Vijay Kumar @ Vijay Tina v. State of Punjab1, in which in para 15, while citing previous judgments, it was held that the police is neither empowered to search and seize the kerosene/case property nor has the jurisdiction to prosecute the accused under Section 7 of the Act.

In view of the above, learned counsel contends that the petitioner is directed to join investigation and if he is sought to be arrested, he shall be immediately released on bail to the satisfaction of arresting/investigation officer and shall abide by the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.”

5. At the very outset, the learned State counsel, on instructions from SI Sanjeev Kapoor, has acknowledge the factual matrix and submitted that the petitioner has already joined the investigation and he is no longer required for further interrogation at this stage. There is no history of his previous involvement in any other criminal case.

6. In the light of aforesaid reason and taking into consideration the totality of the facts and circumstances, emanating from the record, as depicted here-in-above, the instant petition is hereby accepted and the interim bail already granted to petitioner, vide order dated 4.1.2013 is made absolute, subject to compliance of conditions as envisaged under section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

7. Needless to mention that if the petitioner does not cooperate or join the investigation, the prosecution would be at liberty to move a petition for cancellation of his anticipatory bail, in this relevant connection.

*******