Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 1055 (PNJ)

Rajwinder Singh v. State of Punjab

2019-04-03

GURVINDER SINGH GILL

body2019
JUDGMENT Mr. Gurvinder Singh Gill.J. (Oral).:- The petitioner-Rajwinder Singh seeks grant of Anticipatory bail in respect of a case registered vide FIR No.233 dated 12.10.2018 under Sections 21/22/29 of the NDPS Act, 1985, Police Station, Kotwali, Kapurthala. 2. The FIR was registered on the statement of SI Avtar Singh, wherein, it has been alleged that on 12.10.2018 when the police party was present in the area of Village Paharipur, for the purpose of patrolling then one person carrying a black coloured polythene bag was seen coming and who upon noticing the police party threw away the plastic bag and tried to turn back. The said person was apprehended and upon inquiry he disclosed his name Gagandeep. A search of the plastic bag thrown by him, yielded recovery of 20 injections each containing 2 ml of Buprenophine IP .02 ml apart from 5 grams of heroin. During interrogation, he disclosed that he along with brother Rajwinder Singh deal in selling intoxicants since long and that they used to purchase the same from Kuldeep Singh. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and has been nominated as accused solely on the basis of disclosure statement of co-accused Gagandeep and that it is highly unlikely that Gagandeep Singh @ Gaggu would have named his own brother as co-accused. 4. Opposing the petition, the learned State Counsel has submitted that the petitioner is involved in other cases of recovery of contraband also and that in these circumstances, no case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out. It is however, informed, upon instructions from ASI Avtar Singh, that the petitioner has already been joined investigation. 5. Having considered the aforesaid submissions and especially bearing in mind the fact that the petitioner was not arrested at the spot and has already joined investigation, in my opinion, it is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The petition, as such, is accepted and interim directions issued vide order dated 15.12.2018 are made absolute subject to the condition that the petitioner shall appear and join the investigation as and when called upon to do so and cooperate with the Investigating Officer and shall abide by the conditions as provided under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C. 7. The present petition stands accepted accordingly. 8. The present petition stands accepted accordingly. 8. It is, however, clarified that none of the observations made above shall be construed to be an expression on merits of the main case.