CRM-M-1446 of 2011 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-1446 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 28.01.2011 Kuldeep Ram @ Leela ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present: - Mr. G.S. Kaura, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. K.D. Sachdeva, Addl. A.G., 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 anticipatory bail in FIR No.117 dated 21.10.2010 under Sections 15/61/85 of the NDPS Act registered at Police Station Ghagga, Patiala. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that as per the prosecution story no narcotic substance was recovered from the person/possession/custody of the accused/petitioner. As per the prosecution story, petitioner had managed to slip away from the spot at the time of checking. The fact remains that two persons Ashok Kumar and Surinder Kumar were arrested from the spot having found them in possession of five bags of poppy husk. Learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab, on the instructions of SI Kanwal Nain, who is present in Court, has stated that CRM-M-1446 of 2011 (O&M) -2- name of the accused was disclosed by other co-accused in a statement made before the police. Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that any confession or admission made before the police disclosing the name of the petitioner along with co-accused will not be admissible in view of Section 25 of the Evidence Act. Without making any observation on the merits of the case and considering total facts and circumstances of the case present petition is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioner he shall be released on bail by the arresting officer on furnishing personal bond and one surety of Rs.20,000/- subject to the condition under Section 438 (2) of the Code. Petitioner shall join investigation as and when he is required to do so. However, it is clarified that if petitioner does not join the investigation despite of the call by the investigating officer, prosecution shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of the bail. (Alok Singh) Judge January 28, 2011 R.S.