SATWINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this crime due to political rivalry.

(2.) ACCORDING to the FIR, the police received secret information that Gurmukh Singh son of Sadha Singh, Saravjit Kaur daughter of Sadha Singh, Gurwinder Kaur wife of Sadha Singh, resident of Khasan and Satwinder Singh (present petitioner), resident of Hamira and Bhag Singh son of Surinder, resident of Hamira in collaboration with Satta Singh, son of Mohan Singh do the business of selling poppy husk at the Dera of Sadha Singh. Consequently a raid was conducted at the Dera of Sadha Singh. A lady and a man came out of the Dera and sped away in a Tata Sumo vehicle. The petitioner is said to have been apprehended at the Dera and on information being given, the Sub Divisional Magistrate Bholath came on the spot. A search was conducted in his presence. Twenty-five bags of poppy husk were recovered from the Chaffing room. The FIR was registered on 21.7.2000 at 12.30 p.m. It is submitted that the FIR has been recorded at the instance of Gurmukh Singh, Inspector, CIA Staff. It is not disputed that the same officer continued with the investigation of the crime. Apart from this, a perusal of the FIR itself shows that no offer was given, as required under Section 50 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (for short NDPS Act) and an option to have the search conducted in the presence of a Magistrate or a Gazetted Officer was given. The offer, in fact, has been given in the following terms :

(3.) MR . Gandhi has vehemently argued that the case has been planted on the petitioner as he belongs to Mr. Sukhjinder Singh's faction of the Akali party. The complainant party belongs to opposite faction in the Akali Party. Learned counsel also placed on record the resolution passed by the village Panchayat of the village Ramidi to which the petitioner belongs. In this resolution, it is stated that the petitioner was illegally taken in the custody of the CIA staff, Kapurthala at about 4.00 a.m. on 21.7.2000. The resolution expressed the apprehension that the petitioner may be falsely implicated in the case. The father of the petitioner sent telegrams to the Chief Minister and other higher officers at 10.45 a.m., 10.47 a.m. and 10.50 a.m. on 21.7.2000, stating therein that "the Police of Police Station Sultanpur and CIA Staff Kapurthala picked his son Satwinder Singh from his house at 4.00 a.m. today. His life is in danger. Quick action be taken." Having considered the entire matter, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail. I refrain from making any comments on the merits of the submissions made by the learned counsel lest it prejudices the trial at a later stage. Bail is granted to the petitioner to the satisfaction of the CJM, Kapurthala. Bail allowed.