Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sarvan vs State Of Punjab on 3 April, 2024
Author: Pankaj Jain
Bench: Pankaj Jain
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:044826
216 2024:PHHC:044826
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-1401-2024
Date of decision : 03.04.2024
SARVAN ....Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB ....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN
Present : Mr. Ritesh Pandey, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Tarun Aggarwal, Sr. DAG, Punjab.
PANKAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL)
On 11.01.2024, the following order was passed :-
"Apprehending his arrest in FIR No.74 dated
29.05.2023 registered for offence punishable under Sections
21, 27(A) and Section 29 (added later on) of N.D.P.S. Act at
P.S. Ghuman District Batala, the petitioner has preferred this
petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking pre-arrest bail.
Inter alia submits that the petitioner along with co-
accused Palwinder Singh have been nominated on the basis
of disclosure made by Anmolpreet Singh who was
apprehended and found to be in conscious possession of 50
gm of heroin. Further submits that the petitioner has clean
antecedents and relies upon the judgment of Apex Court in
Tofan Singh vs. State of Tamil Nadu, (2021) 4 SCC 1.
Notice of motion
On the asking of the Court, Mr. Tarun Aggarwal, Sr.
D.A.G., Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent.
Adjourned to 03.04.2024.
In the meantime, in the event of arrest, the petitioner
shall be released on interim bail subject to his furnishing
personal and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting
Officer/Investigating Officer. As and when called, the
petitioner shall join the investigation. He shall abide by the
conditions enumerated under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C."
1 of 2
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:044826
CRM-M-1401-2024 -2
2024:PHHC:044826
2. Today, Ld. State Counsel on instructions from ASI Gurmeet
Sing submits that the petitioner has already joined investigation and is
no more required for custodial interrogation.
3. Without commenting on the merits of the case and in view
of the aforesaid fact, order dated 11.01.2024 is made absolute, subject to
the conditions as enumerated under Sections 438(2) Cr.P.C.
4. This order should not be treated as "blanket" order. It will
not be read granting the petitioner indefinite protection from arrest. It
shall be confined to the FIR mentioned ibid and will not operate in
respect of any other incident that involves commission of an offence.
5. This order does not in any manner limit or restrict the rights
or duties of the police or investigating agency to investigate into the
charges against the petitioner.
6. The petitioner shall be deemed to be in custody for the
purpose of Section 27 of the Evidence Act in regard to a discovery of
facts made in pursuance of information supplied by the petitioner in case
the occasion arises.
7. It will be open to the police or the investigating agency to
move this Court for a direction under Section 439(2) Cr.P.C. to arrest the
accused, in the event of violation of any term, such as absconding, non-
cooperating during investigation, evasion, intimidation or inducement to
witnesses with a view to influence outcome of the investigation or trial.
8. Petition stands disposed off accordingly.
April 03, 2024 (Pankaj Jain)
Dpr Judge
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
2 of 2
