IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

Sr. No.216 Decided On : September 03, 2025 Kulbir Singh .... Petitioner vs.

State of Punjab .... Respondent CORAM : HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUKHVINDER KAUR.

* * *

Present : Mr. Simranjeet Singh Sarwara, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Navdeep Singh, DAG, Punjab.

* * *

SUKHVINDER KAUR , J . :

Prayer in the present petition, filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No.122 dated 05.06.2025, under Sections 61, 78(2) of Punjab Excise Act, 1914, registered at Police Station City Rajpura, District Patiala.

Briefly, the facts of the present case are that on 05.06.2025 at about 04:15 PM, during routine patrolling, police party met Excise Inspector along with his team, who signalled towards a car parked outside the house of the petitioner and told them that the petitioner was involved in the business of supplying bottles of liquor in Punjab while purchasing these at cheaper rates from Chandigarh. It was also informed to police party that he had brought heavy quantity of liquor from Chandigarh on that day by loading the same in his car. Upon searching the said car, 141 liquor bottles of different brands with label “for sale in Chandigarh UT” were found in the car. After completing all the formalities, FIR in question was registered against the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He was not present at the spot at the time of alleged recovery and has been named on the basis of statement of one of his relatives that he was owner of the car in question. Learned counsel for the petitioner further urged that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required for any purpose. He is ready and willing to join the investigation and prayed that he be granted concession of anticipatory bail.

Learned State counsel, on the other hand, opposed the present bail petition while contending that the petitioner is involved in two other cases of Excise Act. He is a habitual offender. The raids were conducted to arrest the petitioner but he could not be traced. If the present petition is allowed, the petitioner would certainly not co-operate with the investigation of the case. So, he prayed that the present petition be dismissed.

Heard.

The petitioner has been specifically named in the secret information and the alleged recovery in the present case has been effected from the car bearing registration No.PB-11-CN-6203, parked outside House No.75, Gulab Nagar, Rajpura. The said car belonged to the petitioner, who was its registered owner. Custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required for fair and effective investigation to reveal that from where the petitioner had brought the said liquor and also to know details of other persons involved in the same. Moreover, as per the Status Report, the petitioner appears to be a habitual offender and he is involved in two more cases under the Excise Act. The relief of anticipatory bail is to be granted in exceptional circumstances and to be given sparingly. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, no ground for granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner is made out.

Dismissed.

However, nothing observed herein above shall be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. The observations recorded above are only for the purpose of deciding the present bail petition.

Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of along with the present petition.

September 03, 2025 (SUKHVINDER KAUR)

monika JUDGE