IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-24375 of 2010 Date of decision : 14.10.2010 Shadi Ram …. Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ….. Respondent Present : Mr. Veneet Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Gazi Mohd. Umair, DAG, Punjab. *** S.S. SARON, J. Heard counsel for the parties. The petitioner seeks regular bail in a case registered against him on 18.2.2008 for the offence under Section 15 of the NDPS Act at Police Station Tanda, District Hoshiarpur. The FIR in the case has been registered on the statement of ASI Pardeep Singh, who along with other police officials was patrolling in search of bad elements in a Govt. Gypsy driven by Constable Avtar Singh. They were present at bus stand of village Balalpur where they got information from the informer that Tara and Baba (petitioner-Shadi Ram) were indulging in selling of poppy husk. On the said date i.e. 18.2.2008, they (accused) were coming from the side of Dasuya on a black colour motorcycle. In case a check-post was set up at ‘T’-point Rara mor, then they could be apprehended. Information was found credible and an offence under Section 15 of the NDPS Act was made out against Baba (petitioner-Shadi Ram) and Tara for which a memo was sent to the Police Station. At the checkpost, the petitioner along with his companion came on a motorcycle and when they were stopped by the police, they threw a bag containing 35 kgs of poppy husk and fled away and Crl. Misc. No. M-24375 of 2010 [2] were not apprehended. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is not known by the name of Baba and nick name has been used. Therefore, the identity of the petitioner could not be established. It is submitted that the petitioner was never summoned by the police or by any Court. It is only on 14.6.2010, the police arrested him and since then he is in custody. In response, learned State counsel has submitted that the petitioner was declared a proclaimed offender after registration of FIR on 18.2.2008 and he could be arrested only on 14.6.2010. Therefore, he is not entitled to the concession of bail, although it is accepted on instructions that the petitioner is not involved in any other case. After giving my thoughtful consideration to the matter, it may be noticed that the petitioner was not apprehended at the spot. The bag alleged to have been thrown by the person riding the motorcycle was found containing 35 kgs of poppy husk. The petitioner is not named in the FIR and his name has been mentioned as Baba. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is not known by the name of Baba. This, however, is to be established and gone into by the learned trial Court. Admittedly, there is no other case registered against the petitioner. The petitioner is in custody since 14.6.2010 and his further incarceration is unnecessary. Accordingly, the Crl. Misc. petition is allowed and the petitioner on his furnishing personal bond and surety to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court shall be admitted to bail. (S.S. SARON) JUDGE October 14, 2010 amit