Punjab-Haryana High Court
Saddam Hussain vs State Of Haryana on 22 December, 2022
CRM-M No.59904 of 2022 (O&M) 1
104 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M No.59904 of 2022 (O&M)
Date of decision : 22.12.2022
Saddam Hussain ...... Petitioner
versus
State of Haryana ...... Respondent
CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN
***
Present :- Mr. Sumit S.Bairagi, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Sumit Jain, Addl.AG, Haryana.
***
PANKAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL)
The petitioner has prayed for grant of pre-arrest bail in FIR
No.131 dated 08.05.2022 registered under Section 21 of the NDPS Act,
1985 at Police Station Munak, District Karnal.
Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that there is no
allegation against the accused and he has been nominated on the basis of
disclosure statement suffered by one Manjit @ Molad from whose
possession the alleged contraband has been recovered. Reliance is
being placed upon the law laid down in Tofan Singh Vs. State of Tamil
Nadu, (2021) 4 SCC 1 to contend that such disclosure cannot be relied
upon to implicate the petitioner in the present case.
Per contra, learned State counsel submits that in view of ratio
of law laid down in State of Haryana Vs. Samarth Kumar (2022) 3
RCR Cri.991, the petitioner cannot be granted concession of dictum as
laid down in Tofan Singh's case (supra).
1 of 3
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone
through the records of the case.
The question thus arises is as to whether concession of dictum
of law laid down in the case of Tofan Singh's case (supra) can be
considered at the time of consideration of pre-arrest bail claimed by the
petitioner. The Apex Court in the case of Samarth Kumar's case
(supra) held as under :-
"4. The High Court decided to grant pre-arrest bail to the respondents on
the only ground that no recovery was effected from the respondents and
that they had been implicated only on the basis of the disclosure
statement of the main accused Dinesh Kumar. Therefore, reliance was
placed by the High Court in the majority judgment of this Court in Tofan
Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu reported in (2021) 4 SCC 1.
"xxx xxx xxx
8. In cases of this nature, the respondents may be able to take advantage
of the decision in Tofan Singh vs. State of Tamil Nadu (supra), perhaps
at the time of arguing the regular bail application or at the time of final
hearing after conclusion of the trial.
9. To grant anticipatory bail in a case of this nature is not really
warranted. Therefore, we are of the view that the High Court fell into an
error in granting anticipatory bail to the respondents."
Thereafter another matter involving nomination of an accused
on the disclosure of co-accused came before the Apex Court in the case
of Prabhulal Vs. Central Bureau of Narcotics in Special Leave to
Appeal (Criminal) No.6744/2022. Apex Court vide order dated
11.10.2022 granted interim protection to the petitioner therein.
However, admittedly the same finally resulted in dismissal of the pre-
arrest bail vide order dated 14.12.2022.
In view of the aforesaid facts and the ratio of law laid down by
2 of 3
the Apex Court in the case of Samarth Kumar's case (supra), it can be
safely concluded that the benefit of ratio of law laid down in the case of
Tofan Singh's case (supra) cannot be granted to an accused while
considering pre-arrest bail.
In view of the aforesaid settled law, no ground to grant pre-
arrest bail to the petitioner is made out. Consequently, the same is
ordered to be dismissed.
Needless to say nothing recorded hereinabove should be
construed as expression on merits of the case.
( PANKAJ JAIN )
JUDGE
22.12.2022
Pooja sharma-I
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes
Whether Reportable : No
3 of 3
