Crl. Misc. No. M-11292 of 2011 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-11292 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 16.05.2011 Tarsem Singh ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present: - Mr. Veneet Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Jaspreet Singh, AAG, Punjab. 1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? ***** ALOK SINGH, J (ORAL) Present petition is filed seeking regular bail in case FIR No.106 dated 2.10.2010 under Sections 21/22/25/29 NDPS Act and Sections 179/181/183/184 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Police Station Kathunangal, Amritsar (Rural), District Amritsar. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that alleged recovery memo of the recovery made from the co-accused contains FIR No.106 (Annexure P/1), although as per the prosecution story, on the basis of secret information, naqa was held and co-accused was apprehended and recovery was made on the spot and thereafter, FIR was lodged. Learned counsel further states that petitioner was implicated on the basis of the disclosure statement of the co-accused and petitioner was not apprehended from the spot. He has further stated that mentioning of FIR number on the recovery memo makes the prosecution story highly Crl. Misc. No. M-11292 of 2011 (O&M) -2- doubtful. Mr. Sharma has further argued that disclosure as per the dictum of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Union of India Vs. Bal Mukund and others, 2009(2) RCR (Crl.) 574 an accused cannot be convicted on the basis of confession of co-accused; maker of confession may be bound thereby but not those who had been implicated therein. Considering totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, I direct that petitioner be released on bail to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court. (Alok Singh) Judge May 16, 2011 R.S.