Law Web: Whether court can grant anticipatory bail to accused till filing of chargesheet in NDPS case if FIR does not bears his name?

More so, it is fairly conceded at the bar by the learned

State counsel that the petitioner is not named in the FIR and that the

only semblance of evidence is statement of co-accused and, thus, a

debatable issue arises over the very legality and credibility of such an

evidence which can only be adjudicated at the time of trial. This

Court is of the opinion that it would be a travesty of justice to send

the petitioner in custody in the present case and his joining the

investigation would suffice the purpose. Accordingly, the petitioner is

directed to appear before the Investigating Officer within a period of

15 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and on

his doing so, he shall be released on bail to the satisfaction of the

arresting/investigating officer till submission of report under Section

173 Cr.P.C. (challan). The petitioner shall continue to join

investigation and shall furnish an undertaking that he shall abide by

the conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. Thereafter, he

will be permitted to furnish regular bail bonds to the satisfaction of

the trial Court.

However, it is made clear that in case, during

interrogation of the accused, if any incriminating article is recovered,

the prosecution shall be at liberty to move an application for

cancellation of his bail.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

CRM-M-14077-2020

Date of decision: 05.06.2020

Jasbir Singh Vs State of Punjab

CORAM: MR. JUSTICE FATEH DEEP SINGH

Present: Mr. Varinder Basa, Advocate

Due to the outbreak of pandemic COVID-19, the instant

case is being taken up for hearing through video conferencing.

Mr. Sandeep Vermani, Addl.A.G., Punjab puts in

appearance on behalf of the State on his own.

Petitioner, Jasbir Singh, has come up in this first

anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in case

bearing FIR No.02 dated 07.01.2020 under Sections 21, 23 and 25 of

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act and Sections 411,

414, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25 of the Arms Act

registered at Police Station Gharinda, Amritsar Rural, District

Amritsar.

The present case was got registered on secret

information received by the police official, ASI Ajay Pal Singh to the

effect that accused, Dharminder Singh, Ajaypal Singh s/o Sukhdev

Singh, Paramjit Singh @ Pamma, Balkar Singh and Rahul Chauhan

along with others, including the petitioners, were carrying on

nefarious trade in heroin as well as illegal weapons, which they used

to bring in India through drone and that co-accused/non-applicant,

Rahul Chauhan, an army man, posted in the area was instrumental in

drove flying and on the basis of which, the co-accused/non-applicant-

Dharminder Singh was arrested leading to recovery of `6,22,240/-

and a drone.

Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that

petitioner is not named in the FIR and that similarly placed coaccused/

non-applicant-Dildar Singh has been allowed interim bail by

this Court vide order dated 01.06.2020 and that the case of the

petitioner is not distinguishable from that of his co-accused.

The learned State counsel has strongly opposed the

grant of bail on the grounds that the drone has been recovered from

two of the accused and the are actively participating and carrying on

nefarious trade in drugs and illicit arms which funds the terrorists

and, therefore, in view of the seriousness of the allegations, a

comprehensive investigations into the episode needs to be carried

on.

Going through the submissions of the two sides, this

Court vide order dated 01.06.2020 has granted interim bail to the

co-accused, Dildar Singh, who is similarly placed as to the

petitioner. More so, it is fairly conceded at the bar by the learned