Crl. Misc. No. M- 858 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M- 858 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: March 30, 2010 Ameer Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH Present: Mr. Vivek K. Thakur, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. A.S. Brar, Sr. DAG, Punjab. GURDEV SINGH, J. This petition under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code has been filed by Ameer Singh-petitioner, for anticipatory bail in FIR No. 325 dated 10.12.2009, registered at Police Station Jagraon, District Ludhiana, under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). According to him, he has been falsely implicated due to enmity with the police. Earlier also, false cases were registered against him and one of those cases was under Section 307 IPC. He was acquitted in that case and once again he has been falsely implicated in the present case. The provisions of the Act were not complied with. There is no independent witness of recovery, though the same is alleged to have been effected in a broad day light. A false story has been concocted and the same is highly improbable. There is a serious dispute regarding his identity, as he is alleged to have escaped from the Crl. Misc. No. M- 858 of 2010 2 spot. As per the contents of the FIR, a secret information was received by the Investigating Officer that the petitioner alongwith another boy were indulging in the supply of poppy husk in huge quantity in the villages on a car make Zen bearing registration No. PB-61-3100. Thereafter, a nakabandi (picketing) was held on the link road from Malka to village Bodalwala. The DSP was also called to that place. After about 20 minutes, the said car was found coming from the side of Bodalwala, which was signalled to stop with the help of a torch light. The petitioner was sitting on the front seat. The car was being driven by an unidentified person. After stopping the car, the driver as well as the petitioner escaped from the spot. When the search of the car was taken, seven bags of poppy husk were recovered. 30 kgs. of poppy husk was found in each of those bags. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that as per column No.3 of the FIR, the recovery was effected at 7.15 AM and it cannot be believed that during the day light such signal will be given with the help of torch light. In fact, there is an old enmity between the petitioner and the police, who had been planting false cases upon him one after another and one of those cases was registered under Section 307 IPC, in which he was acquitted just a couple of days back before the registration of the present FIR. The present FIR was registered on account of that acquittal of the petitioner. A minute perusal of the FIR itself shows that it was the ruqa which was received at the Police Station at 7.15 AM. The same was sent after the recovery was effected and other proceedings were taken at the spot. Crl. Misc. No. M- 858 of 2010 3 Thus, the revoery must have have taken place about an hour before 7.15 AM. It was the month of December and judicial notice can be taken of the fact that it is usually dark at that time. The affidavit of Harinder Singh Chahal, SSP, was filed in this case, in which he has deposed that five cases under the Act were registered against the petitioner and he was acquitted in three of those cases. It is also a fact that another case under Section 307 IPC was registered against him in which he was acquitted. It cannot be said that on account of that acquittal he has been falsely implicated in this case. Rather, from the fact that such cases are registered against him it can easily be concluded that the police officials, who were present at the spot, were in a position to identify him. There is nothing on record that false FIR has been registered against the petitioner. As the petitioner had escaped from the spot, so the investigating agency is to establish his identification also. The same can be done by holding a test identity parade. The very purpose of such investigation will be defeated in case the petitioner is armed with an order of anticipatory bail. The remedy of anticipatory bail is an extraordinary remedy, to be resorted to in special circumstances. The facts of the present case are such that the petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of anticipatory bail. The petition is dismissed accordingly. March 30, 2010 (GURDEV SINGH ) prem JUDGE