DENISH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Apprehending his arrest in the criminal case pertaining to the FIR bearing No.69 dtd. 12/5/2021 registered at Police Station Balachaur, District Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar, under Ss. 21(1), 4(1) of the Mine and Minerals (RD) Act, 1957 (for short 'the Act of 1957') wherein the offences under Ss. 465, 468 and 471 IPC are stated to have been added later-on, the petitioner has preferred this petition for seeking the relief of anticipatory bail.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned State counsel in the present petition and have also perused the file thoroughly.

(3.) The petitioner is the owner of the tractor as well as the trolley allegedly found to be loaded with sand. It has categorically been deposed in para No. 5 of the Status-report that Balvir Chand, who was running the above-said Stone Crusher on lease, had made a statement to the effect that he did not issue the above-said Bill and that the offences under Ss. 465, 468 and 471 IPC were added in the case in view of this fact. It being so, the possibility of the requirement of the custodial interrogation of the petitioner so as to elicit the truth qua the modus-operandi adopted for procuring/preparing the said Bill, cannot be ruled out.