Pamma v. State of Punjab
Case Details
CRM-M-19778-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 1 CRM-M-19778-2025 Reserved on: 06.05.2025 Pronounced on: 15.05.2025 Paramjit Singh @ Pamma ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present:
Legal Reasoning
Mr. Avtar Singh Khinda, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sukhwinder Singh Rai, DAG, Punjab. ANOOP CHITKARA, J. **** FIR No. Dated Police Station Sections 24 15.04.2024 Bilga, District 61 of Punjab Excise Act 1914 Jalandhar 1. The petitioner apprehending arrest in the FIR captioned above has come up before this Court under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS], seeking anticipatory bail. 2. As per paragraph 11 of the bail petition, the accused declares that he is involved in other cases, not declared proclaimed offender and acquitted in four cases. 3. The facts and allegations are taken from the reply filed by the State. On 15.04.2024 based on secret information, raid was conducted and the Police seized 2000 litre ‘lahan’, from where three persons on seeing the police, ran away from the spot. Thereafter, FIR was registered against Balwinder Singh @ Matri, Shinder Pal and Paramjit Singh @ Pamma (petitioner). 4. The petitioner approached the Sessions Court for anticipatory bail, which was denied. 5. The petitioner's counsel submits that petitioner shall not repeat the offence and if he does so, he has no objection if State files an application for cancellation of bail. He further prays for bail by imposing any stringent conditions and contends that pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and their family. 6. ANJU RANI 2025.05.16 16:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh The State’s counsel opposes bail and refers to the reply. 1 CRM-M-19778-2025 7. It would be appropriate to refer to the following portions of the reply, which read 2 as follows: “That the petitioner was specifically named by the secret informer wherein the secret informer had stated that the petitioner along with co-accused Balwinder Singh @ Matri, Shinder Palhave kept 'Lahan' underneath the land And in case the raid is conducted then huge quantity of Lahan' alongwith its covers and drums can be recovered. Thereafter, a raid was conducted and on seeing the police officials, the petitioner along with co- accused Balwinder Singh @ Matri, Shinder Pal fled from the spot. A search was conducted and 2000 litre lahan' was recovered, which was
Decision
disposed of at the spot as per the orders of Excise Inspector and 10 covers were taken into police possession. However, the iron drums in which the "lahan" was stored was taken into police possession.” REASONING: 8. Allegations against the petitioner are that he along with two other persons, was in possession of lahan which they kept by digging the land near Satluj river but there is no specific evidence against the petitioner except secret information. Recovery of the lahan was already been effected and report of Excise Inspector qua the material has already been obtained as such, no ground is made out to deny bail. 9. Pre-trial incarceration should not be a replica of post-conviction sentencing. The evidence might be prima facie sufficient to launch prosecution or to frame charges, but this Court is not considering the evidence at that stage but is analyzing it for the stage of anticipatory bail. An analysis of the above does not justify custodial interrogation or pre- trial incarceration. 10. Given the above, the penal provisions invoked coupled with the primafacie analysis of the nature of allegations and the other factors peculiar to this case, there would be no justifiability for custodial interrogation or the pre-trial incarceration at this stage. Without commenting on the case's merits, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, and for the reasons mentioned above, the petitioner makes a case for anticipatory bail. 11. Given above, provided the petitioner is not required in any other case, the petitioner shall be released on bail in the FIR captioned above subject to furnishing bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, and if the matter is before a Court, then the concerned Court and due to unavailability before any nearest Ilaqa Magistrate/duty Magistrate. Before accepting the surety, the concerned Officer/Court must be satisfied that if the accused fails to appear, such surety can produce the accused. ANJU RANI 2025.05.16 16:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh 2 CRM-M-19778-2025 12. While furnishing a personal bond, the petitioner shall mention the following personal identification details: 3 1. AADHAR number 2. Passport number (If available) and when the attesting officer/court considers it appropriate or considers the accused a flight risk. 3. Mobile number (If available) 4. E-Mail id (If available) 13. 14. The bail order is subject to the petitioner’s complying with the following terms. The petitioner is directed to join the investigation within seven days of uploading this order on the official webpage of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana and as and when called by the Investigator. The petitioner shall be in deemed custody for Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872/ Section 23 of BSA, 2023. The petitioner shall join the investigation as and when called by the Investigating Officer or any Superior Officer and shall cooperate with the investigation at all further stages as required. In the event of failure to do so, the prosecution will be open to seeking cancellation of the bail. During the investigation, the petitioner shall not be subjected to third-degree, indecent language, inhuman treatment, etc. 15. The petitioner shall abide by all statutory bond conditions and appear before the concerned Court(s) on all dates. The petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence, influence, browbeat, pressurize, induce, threaten, or promise, directly or indirectly, any witnesses, Police officials, or any other person acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case or dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Police or the Court. 16. In case the Investigator/Officer-In-Charge of the concerned Police Station arraigns another section of any penal offense in this FIR, and if the new section prescribes a maximum sentence that is not greater than the sections mentioned above, then this bail order shall be deemed to have also been passed for the newly added section(s). However, suppose the newly inserted sections prescribe a sentence exceeding the maximum sentence prescribed in the sections mentioned above; then, in that case, the Investigator/Officer-In-Charge shall give the petitioner notice of a minimum of seven days, providing an opportunity to avail the remedies available in law. 17. In Md. Tajiur Rahaman v. The State of West Bengal, decided on 08-Nov-2024, SLP (Crl) 12225-2024, Hon’ble Supreme Court holds in Para 7, “It goes without saying that if the petitioner is found involved in such like offence in future, the concession of bail granted to him today will liable to be withdrawn and the petitioner is bound to face the necessary consequences.” 18. This bail is conditional, and the foundational condition is that if the petitioner ANJU RANI 2025.05.16 16:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh 3 CRM-M-19778-2025 indulges in any non-bailable offense or repeats the offence, the State may file an application for cancellation of this bail before the Sessions Court, which shall have the liberty to cancel this bail. 4 19. Any observation made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments. 20. A certified copy of this order would not be needed for furnishing bonds, and any Advocate for the Petitioner can download this order along with case status from the official web page of this Court and attest it to be a true copy. If the attesting officer wants to verify its authenticity, such an officer can also verify its authenticity and may download and use the downloaded copy for attesting bonds. 21. Petition allowed in terms mentioned above. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 15.05.2025 anju rani Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes No. Whether reportable: ANJU RANI 2025.05.16 16:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh 4