AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Pankaj Jain, J
On 04.03.2024, the following order was passed :-
“Inter alia relies upon order dated 22.02.2024 passed in CRM-M No.52982 of 2023 (Annexure P-3) whereby the co-accused Dinesh Kumar has been granted the concession of bail.
Notice of motion
On the asking of the Court, Mr. Tarun Aggarwal, Sr. D.A.G., Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent.
Learned State counsel is not in a position to dispute that role of the petitioner as alleged would be similar to that of Dinesh Kumar.
Counsel for the petitioner further submits that so far as the accused - Navkarandeep Singh is concerned, his pre-arrest bail has been dimissed vide order dated 15.12.2020 passed in CRM-M No.21750 of 2020. However, later on he surrendered and stands admitted to regular bail.
The aforesaid fact has also not been disputed by the learned State counsel on instructions from ASI Gurdial Singh Hira.
Adjourned to 01.05.2024.
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.”
Today, Ld. State Counsel on instructions from ASI Gurdial submits that the petitioner has already joined investigation and is no more required for custodial interrogation.
Without commenting on the merits of the case and in view of the aforesaid fact, order dated 04.03.2024 is made absolute, subject to the conditions as enumerated under Sections 438(2) Cr.P.C.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Petition stands disposed off accordingly.