Roshan Lal @ Kala vs State of Punjab

The petitioner prays for grant of anticipatory bail in FIR FIR No.47 dated 27.03.2017 registered under Sections 15/18/21/22/61/85 of the Narcotic

Drug and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, at Police Station Garhshankar, District Hoshiarpur.

The operative part of the order dated 31.07.2018, vide which interim anticipatory bail has been granted to the petitioner, is reproduced as under:-

“….Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the concession of interim anticipatory bail to the co-accused of the petitioner namely Balvir Singh

@ Bira has already been granted by this Court vide order dated 14.06.2018 passed in CRM-M No.25961 of 2018, by passing the following order:-

“Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the FIR was registered on the basis of some secret information against 09 persons and subsequent

thereto, no recovery was effected from the petitioner or any other co-accused. It is further submitted that the Additional Sessions Judge vide order

dated 17.04.2017 had granted interim anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to joining the investigation and appearance before the Investigating

Officer, however, the petitioner could not appear before the Investigating Officer on account of some communication gap between him and his

counsel and the Additional Sessions Judge vide order dated 06.06.2017 had dismissed the application.

Counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that, at the first instance, all the accused persons were granted anticipatory bail and the petitioner is

ready to appear before the Investigating Officer and join the investigation.

Notice of motion for 13.09.2018.

In the meantime, the petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer on 28.06.2018 at 10:00 am or on any other date or time fixed by

him to join investigation and he shall be released on interim bail on furnishing bail/surety bonds subject to the following conditions:-

He shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

He shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him

from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; and

He shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court.â€​

Counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that 06 other co-accused of the petitioner have already been granted the concession of anticipatory

bail by the Additional Sessions Judge and in pursuance to the FIR, no recovery was effected.

Counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Gurmail Singh, has submitted that the petitioner is involved in other cases and seeks some time to file

affidavit, in this regard.

List again on 13.09.2018....â€​

Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that, in pursuance to the order dated 31.07.2018, the petitioner has already appeared before the Investigating

Officer and has joined the investigation.

Counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Surjit Kumar, has not disputed the aforesaid fact and submits that the petitioner is involved in some

other cases, in which he is on bail.

In view of the above and considering the fact that it is case of no recovery, this petition is allowed and the interim bail granted to the petitioner vide

order dated 31.07.2018 is made absolute subject to the conditions envisaged under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.