IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Reserved on: 13.01.2025 Pronounced on: 27.01. 2025 Kala Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Argued by: Mr. Kuldip Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Jasjit Singh, DAG, Punjab.

****

ANOOP CHITKARA, J.

FIR No. Dated Police Station Sections

98 31.08.2024 Arniwala, District 303 (2) BNS, 21 (1) and 4(1)

Fazilka of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957

1. The petitioner apprehending arrest in the FIR captioned above has come up before this Court under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS], seeking anticipatory bail.

2. In paragraph 16 of the bail petition, the accused declares that he has no criminal antecedents.

3. The facts and allegations are being taken from the reply filed by the State, which reads as follows:

“3. That the facts of the case are as under:- (i) The FIR in question was registered against the petitioner-accused on the basis of recovery of stolen sand. Brief facts of the case are that on 31.08.2024, when the police party headed by ASI Malkeet Singh, in Govt. vehicle No.PB-22K-9057 Bolero was present at Bus Stand Mandi Roran Wali, for the patrolling purposes and checking suspicious persons, then an information was received by the police that Kala Singh son of Khushal Singh resident of Village Paliwala who is habitual of indulging in the illegal mining, is today also carrying sand in the tractor Tractor Swaraj 744 attached with trolley from the side of Village Sarrian Wala and if naka is established on link road near Pipe Factory, then the said person can be apprehended with stolen sand. The information being reliable and solid and fulfilling the ingredients of Section 303(2) of BNS, 2023 and Sections 21(1) & 4(1) of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, the FIR in question was got registered against the petitioner- accused by sending ruqa to the police station. (ii) On the same day i.e. 31.08.2024, ASI Malkeet Singh alongwith fellow police officials established a naka at the place indicated by the informant. After some time, a tractor trolley Swaraj blue and white colour, attached with trolley loaded with sand was seen coming from the side of Village Sarrian Wala which was being driven by a clean shaven person. On seeing the police, the said person stopped the tractor trolley at a distance and after leaving the tractor trolley there, he succeeded in running away from the spot. ASI Malkeet Singh identified the said person as Kala Singh (present petitioner) as he already knew him. The tractor and trolley (loaded with sand) were taken into police custody by following proper procedure.”

4. The petitioner's counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent conditions and contends that further pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and their family.

5. The State’s counsel opposes bail and refers to the reply.

6. It would be appropriate to refer to the following portions of the reply, which read as follows:

“4. That during the investigation, the incriminating evidence came on the file against the petitioner. During the investigation, it was found that the said tractor Swaraj (No.PB-57A-9727) and trolley which were used in commission of crime, belonged to the petitioner-accused. The petitioner indulged into illegal mining of sand from the land and stolen the same. The challan is yet to be filed in the learned court.”

7. The Police did not arrest the petitioner; if they intended to arrest the petitioner, it was not impossible. A perusal of the reply does not point out the steps taken to arrest the accused.

8. Pre-trial incarceration should not be a replica of post-conviction sentencing. The evidence might be prima facie sufficient to launch prosecution or to frame charges, but this Court is not considering the evidence at that stage but is analyzing it for the stage of anticipatory bail. An analysis of the above does