Punjab-Haryana High Court
Manpreet Singh Alias Mangi vs State Of Punjab on 18 December, 2023
2023:PHHC:162368
207
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Crl. Misc. No. M-59485 of 2023
Date of Decision: December 18, 2023
Manpreet Singh @ Mangi
eens Petitioner
versus
State of Punjab
seve Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR
kK
Present:- Mr. Vijay Lath, Advocate
for the petitioner
Mr. I.P.S. Sabharwal, DAG Punjab
36 2 2
Harpreet Singh Brar, J. (Oral)
1. Prayer in the petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is for grant of
anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.0076 dated 14.09.2023 registered
under Section 379 IPC and Sections 21(1), 4(1) of Mines and Minerals (Regulation
of Development) Act, 1957 and Sections 29, 30, 32 and 33 of the Indian Forest
Act, 1927 at Police Station Kiratpur Sahib, District Rupnagar.
2. On 24.11.2023, the following order was passed :-
"The present petition has been filed under Section 438 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in
FIR No. 0076 dated 14.09.2023 registered under Section 379 of IPC
and Sections 21 (1), 4 (1) of Mines and Minerals (Regulation of
Development) Act, 1957 and Sections 29, 30, 32 and 33 of the Indian
Forest Act, 1927 at Police Station Kiratpur, District Rupnagar.
Any contravention under the Mines and Minerals (Development
and Regulation) Act, 1957 is cognizable and punishable under Section
21 of the above Act which is bailable with maximum sentence of 02
REENA
2023.12.18 19:25
| attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this order/ judgment
Chandigarh
2023:PHHC:162368
REENA
2023.12.18 19:25
| attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this order/ judgment
Chandigarh
years. As such, FIR cannot be registered under the provisions of
Indian Penal Code. The Mines and Minerals (Development and
Regulation) Act, 1957 is special enactment regulating the extraction
of mines and minerals and as such any contraventions of the Act or
the Rules made therein are squarely dealt with by the provisions of
the above Act. It is well-settled principle of law that if a special
Statute lays down procedures, the one laid down under the general
provisions of IPC would not be attracted as laid down by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in 'Jeewan Kumar Raut and another Vs. Central
Bureau of Investigation, 2009 (7) SCC 526 and the judgment of this
Court in 'Ajay Kumar Sandhu Vs. State of Haryana' CRM-M-
29708-2014 (O&M).
Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that he
has been falsely implicated in the present case. He relies upon
judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Siddharam
Satlingappa Mhetre vs. State of Maharashtra and others, 2011(1)
RCR(Criminal) 126 to contend that irrational and indiscriminate
arrest must be avoided and prays for anticipatory bail.
Adjourned to 18.12.2023.
In the meantime, keeping in view the law enunciated by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. CBI (2022) 10
SCC 51; Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273 and
Mohd. Muslim alias Hussain Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) 2023 SCC
OnLine SC 352, at the first instance, the petitioner is directed to
appear before the Investigating Officer on or before 04.12.2023 and
on his doing so or in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be
admitted to interim bail on furnishing of bail/surety bond to the
satisfaction of the Investigating/Arresting Officer. The petitioner shall
cooperate with the Investigating Officer and abide by the conditions
as provided under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C.
If the Investigating/Arresting Officer does not permit the
petitioner to join the investigation, the petitioner would appear before
the Illaga Magistrate, who would then summon the Arresting Officer
and direct him to join the petitioner in investigation, in terms of the
2023:PHHC:162368
order of this Court.
Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed as expression
of opinion of this Court on merits of the case and the trial Court shall
proceed without being prejudiced by observations of this Court. "
3. Learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Sushil Kumar, states
that pursuant to order dated 24.11.2023, the petitioner has joined the
investigation on 03.12.2023 and is no more required for custodial interrogation.
4. In view of the statement of learned State counsel, order dated
24.11.2023 is made absolute. The petitioner shall abide by the terms and conditions
enumerated in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
5. Petition stands disposed of.
6. Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed as expression of
opinion of this Court on merits of the case and trial court shall proceed without
being prejudiced by observations of this Court.
(HARPREET SINGH BRAR)
JUDGE
December 18, 2023
PEER
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether Reportable : Yes/No
REENA
2023.12.18 19:25
| attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this order/ judgment
Chandigarh
