Criminal Misc. No. M-18692 of 2009 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** Criminal Misc. No. M-18692 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision:17.07.2009 Malkiat Singh .....Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab .....Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARBANS LAL Present:- Mr. H.S. Sullar, Advocate for the petitioner. **** HARBANS LAL, J. This petition has been moved by Malkiat Singh under Section 438 of Cr.P>C seeking his anticipatory bail in case FIR No.27 dated 10.5.2009 registered under Sections 452, 323, 148 and 149 of IPC in P.S. Budhlada, District Mansa. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The injury attributed to the petitioner is with cricket bat on the left arm of the injured. The weapon of offence is yet to be recovered. That being so, his custodial interrogation is required. In State Represented By the C.B.I v. Anil Sharma, 1997(4) Recent Criminal Reports (Criminal) 268 (SC), it has been held as under:- “We find force in the submission of the CBI that custodial interrogation is qualitatively more elicitation-oriented than questioning a suspect who is well ensconced with a favourable order under Section 438 of the Code. In a case like this, effective interrogation of a suspected person is of tremendous Criminal Misc. No. M-18692 of 2009 (O&M) -2- advantage in disinterring many useful informations and also materials which would have been concealed. Success in such interrogation would elude if the suspected person knows that he is well protected and insulated by a pre-arrest bail order during the time he is interrogated. Very often interrogation in such a condition would reduce to a mere ritual. The argument that the custodial interrogation is fraught with the danger of the person being subjected to third-degree methods need not be countenanced, for, such an argument can be advanced by all accused in all criminal cases. The Court has to presume that responsible police officers would conduct themselves in a responsible manner and that those entrusted with the task of disinterring offences would not conduct themselves as offenders.” The provisions of Section 438 ibid cannot be invoked where custodial interrogation is necessary or may hamper proper investigation. A Court considering an application under this Section must strike a balance between the rights of an accused and the duties and obligation conferred upon an investigating agency. Considering the facts of the present case in the light of the provisions of Section 438 ibid, I am of the considered opinion that the present petition merits dismissal. Thus, this petition is dismissed. July 17, 2009 ( HARBANS LAL ) renu JUDGE