IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc M-26396 of 2008 Date of decision: 16.1.2009 Satish Kumar …Petitioner Versus State of Haryana …Respondent Present: Mr HS Sullar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr AS Ghangas, DAG Haryana. S.S. SARON, J. Heard counsel for the parties. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in a case registered against him under Section 61 of the Punjab Excise Act (as applicable to State of Haryana) ( for short – the Act ). Kashmiri Lal SI of PS City Panipat on 10.8.1997 along with other Police officials was present at the Bus Stand Panipat for patrolling. A secret information was received that Raju, Vijay Singh, Satish Kumar (petitioner), Balwan Singh, Raghbir Singh, Bhupinder Singh @ Goga and Subhash, in connivance with each other were bringing liquor from Chandigarh in Car No. CHOI 7239(T) to sell it at Panipat. On the day of the occurrence i.e. on 10.8.1997 also, they had brought liquor and were unloading the same in the shops near Karnal Octroi Post. If a raid was conducted there, the culprits could be apprehended with liquor. On receiving the information, a case inter alia for the offence under Section 61 of the Act was made out. 1 Criminal Misc M -26396 of 2008 It may be noticed that the case was registered when prohibition policy was applicable in the State of Haryana. Kashmiri Lal SI conducted a raid near the Octroi Post at Karnal on the outskirts of Panipat town. Three persons were found unloading the liquor from the car that had been disclosed. Five other persons ran away from the spot. In any case, 96 bottles of Indian made foreign liquor were recovered from the car while 1066 bottles of liquor were recovered from the nearby godown. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is in no manner involved in the case. It is submitted that the case is of 10.8.1997 and it has been alleged that the petitioner was declared a PO; however, there is no record of any kind showing that the petitioner was declared a PO. Besides, it is submitted that in compliance with the interim bail granted by this Court, the petitioner has joined the investigation. Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from SI Ram Kumar of PS City Panipat has submitted that the petitioner has joined the investigation and his further custody is not required for the purposes of investigation. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the fact that it is a 10 years old case when prohibition policy was in force, it would be just and expedient to grant the petitioner pre-arrest bail. In the circumstances, the criminal misc petition is allowed and the interim bail granted on 7.10.2008 is made absolute and shall continue till the filing of the challan by the Police. 16.1.2009. ( S.S.SARON ) ASR JUDGE 2