JUDGMENT

Anoop Chitkara, J. (Oral). -

1. The petitioner apprehending arrest in the FIR captioned above has come up before this Court under Section 438 CrPC seeking anticipatory bail.

2. Para 14 of the bail petition mentions the following criminal history:

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the police sought petitioner's arrest because he was named by one of the co-accused. Learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that the custodial investigation would serve no purpose whatsoever, and the pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and family.

4. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the bail on the grounds that the petitioner is a habitual offender and is also involved in another case under the NDPS Act.

REASONING:

5. In Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v State of Punjab, 1980 (2) SCC 565, (Para 30), a Constitutional Bench of Supreme Court held that the bail decision must enter the cumulative effect of the variety of circumstances justifying the grant or refusal of bail. In Kal