High CourtsSingle Bench

Kans Raj vs State Of Punjab

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 30 December 2020 · Citation: (2020) 12 P&H CK 0474

HON’BLE JUDGES
Avneesh Jhingan, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Punjab Excise Act, 1914 — Section 61(1) · Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438(2)
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Petition (M) No. 44260 Of 202
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

18 paragraphs · 354 words

Avneesh Jhingan, J

The matter is taken up for hearing through video conference due to COVID-19 situation.

This is a petition seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No. 109, dated 27th May, 2020 under Section 61 (1) of the Punjab Excise Act, 1914, registered at

Police Station Sadar, District Pathankot.

It is stated in the FIR that secret information was received that petitioner is doing a business of illicit liquor and if raid is conducted in his new house

where he is not residing presently, then heavy quantity of liquor can be recovered. As a result of secret information, raid was conducted. As per story

forthcoming, the petitioner was sitting on a bed and on asking, he disclosed his name. 60 bottles of illicit liquor were recovered from two plastic Cans

which were lying under the bed on which petitioner was sitting.

Mr. S.K. Choudhary, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated, in fact he was not there at the

time of raid and no recovery was made therefrom.

Mr. Amit Mehta, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab submits that petitioner is a habitual offender and other cases are also pending against him.

If the story put forth in the FIR is to be believed, the petitioner was sitting on the bed at the time of raid, two plastic Cans were recovered from under

the bed where he was sitting. In raid he disclosed his name, yet nothing is forthcoming why he was not arrested at the spot. Merely, the fact that there

are other cases pending against him, would not be a ground to deprive him of personal liberty. More so, no recovery is to be made from the petitioner.

Petitioner is granted anticipatory bail subject to his joining investigation within a week. In the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail

subject to his furnishing adequate bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Investigating/ Arresting Officer. He is directed to join the investigation as and

when called. He shall abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section 438 (2) Cr. P.C.

The petition is allowed.