Punjab-Haryana High Court
Surjit Kaur vs State Of Punjab on 17 March, 2022
In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana
At Chandigarh
CRM-M-3601-2021 (O&M)
Date of Decision:-17.3.2022
Surjit Kaur ... Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab ... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL
Present:- Ms. Puja Chopra, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Luvinder Sofat, AAG, Punjab,
assisted by ASI Sinder Singh.
*****
GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J.(Oral)
1. The petitioner seeks grant of anticipatory bail in respect of a case registered
against her vide FIR No.93 dated 5.7.2020 at Police Station City Samana,
District Patiala under Section 22 of Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic
Substances Act, wherein offence under Sections 25 and 29 of NDPS Act
were added later on.
2. At the time of issuance of notice of motion, the following order was passed
on 29.1.2021:
"Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is the second
petition seeking grant of anticipatory bail and that the earlier
1 of 3
(2) CRM-M-3601-2021 (O&M)
petition had been dismissed as incorrect information has been
furnished on behalf of the State to the effect that the petitioner
stands convicted in two identical cases whereas the said position is
not correct. Learned counsel in this regard has drawn the attention
of this Court to a judgment dated 12.5.2012 (Annexure P-6) passed
by the Court of Special Judge, Patiala, vide which the petitioner
has been acquitted in respect of FIR No. 238, dated 18.6.2010,
Police Station Samana, under Section 21 of NDPS Act. Learned
counsel has also drawn the attention of this Court to another
judgment passed by this Court wherein the conviction of the
petitioner for having been in possession of commercial quantity of
contraband was altered to conviction for a noncommercial quantity
of contraband.
Learned counsel has further submitted that the instant case is a
case wherein the petitioner was never arrested at the spot and is
alleged to have been nominated as an accused on the basis of a
disclosure statement allegedly made by co-accused. It has been
submitted that the petitioner has been implicated falsely as she
happens to be a Panch of the village, on account of political
rivalries in the village.
Notice of motion for 27.5.2021.
Meanwhile, in the event of arrest, the petitioner be released on
interim bail subject to her furnishing personal bonds and surety
bonds to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer.
However, the petitioner shall join the investigation as and when
called upon to do so and cooperate with the
Arresting/Investigating Officer and shall abide by the conditions as
provided under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C."
3. Learned State counsel, upon instructions from the Investigating Officer, has
informed that pursuant to interim directions, the petitioner has since joined
investigation and she is not required for any custodial interrogation.
2 of 3
(3) CRM-M-3601-2021 (O&M)
4. Having regard to the aforestated position, wherein the petitioner having been
nominated on the basis of a disclosure statement and being a lady and is
stated to have joined investigation and is not required for any custodial
interrogation, the petition is accepted and the interim directions issued by
this Court vide order dated 29.1.2021 are hereby made absolute, subject to
the condition that the petitioner shall join investigation as and when called
upon to do so and cooperate with the Investigating Officer and shall also
abide by the conditions as provided under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
17.3.2022 ( Gurvinder Singh Gill )
pankaj Judge
Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No
Whether Reportable Yes / No
3 of 3
