Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Raj Mohan Singh, J.
Gurmeet Singh Alias Kala - Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab - Respondent
CRM-M-3-2021
Decided On : 02-03-2021
Anticipatory Bail - Punjab Excise Act - The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner under the Punjab Excise Act, 1914, based on the circumstances of the case and subject to specific conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought anticipatory bail in a case registered under Sections 61, 1, 14 of the Punjab Excise Act, 1914, at Police Station Ghagga, District Patiala. The raid was conducted based on secret information, and independent witnesses were not joined as required by Section 100 of Cr.P.C. The petitioner had no pending cases under the Punjab Excise Act, except two cases under the Indian Penal Code.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the circumstances warranted the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, directing the petitioner to appear before the SHO/Investigating Officer for investigation and imposing specific conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
Issues: Grant of anticipatory bail under the Punjab Excise Act, 1914, non-joining of independent witnesses, and the petitioner's pending cases under the Indian Penal Code.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the lack of joining of independent witnesses, the absence of pending cases under the Punjab Excise Act, and the specific circumstances of the case in granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Final Decision: The petition for anticipatory bail was allowed, and the petitioner was directed to appear before the SHO/Investigating Officer for investigation, with specific conditions imposed under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
ORDER
Raj Mohan Singh. J. (Oral). - The case has been taken up for hearing through video conferencing.
2. The petitioner seeks grant of anticipatory bail in case bearing FIR No.0195 dated 12.12.2020 registered under Sections 61, 1, 14 of the Punjab Excise Act, 1914, at Police Station Ghagga, District Patiala.
3. As per the prosecution case, the raid was conducted on the basis of secret information.
4. The prosecution has not joined the independent witnesses in terms of Section 100 of Cr.P.C. This fact has been verified by the learned State Counsel, on instructions from ASI Khem Chand. No other case under the Punjab Excise Act, is pending against the petitioner except two cases under the Indian Penal Code.
5. Looking to the aforesaid circumstances, I am of the view that the petitioner has made out a case for the grant of anticipatory bail. The petition is allowed. Petitioner is directed to appear before the SHO/lnvestigating Officer to join investigation on 07.03.2021 and in the event of his arrest, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of SHO/lnvestigating Agency subject to the following conditions as envisaged under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C:-
i) that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer as and when required;
ii) that the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
iii) that the petitioner shall not leave the country, without prior permission of the Court and shall surrender his passport, if any
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
