Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 59503 (PNJ)

RAMESHWAR DASS v. STATE OF HARYANA

CRM-M/28073/2025 · 2025-05-21

H S Grewal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 107 CRM-M-28073-2025 Date of decision: 21.05.2025 RAMESHWAR DASS ....Petitioner V/s STATE OF HARYANA ....Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present: Mr.Amit Choudhary, Advocate, for the petitioner. ***** H.S.GREWAL, J. (ORAL) 1. This is a petition for anticipatory bail filed under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in case FIR No.348 dated 04.10.2024 under Sections 15 (c ), 27-A, 29 of the NDPS Act, 1985 and Sections 61(2), 287, 111(1) and 238 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 25 of the Arms Act, registered at Police Station Bhuna, District Fatehabad. 2. The case of the prosecution is that on receiving of a secret information that an abandoned truck was lying parked in village Dhani Gopal for the last three days, a search was conducted by the police party. During search of the said vehicle, a recovery of 8 quintals and 19 Kgs. of poppy husk was effected from it. It was found during investigation that the registered owner of the said truck was Sanjeev Kumar son of Satyanarayan, who had disclosed that the truck was sold to the present petitioner, however, the ownership had not yet been transferred in his name since the installments of loan taken while purchasing the same were yet to be paid in full. POONAM RATHORE 2025.05.23 16:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRM-M-28073-2025 -2- 3. Notice of motion. 4. On the asking of the Court Ms.Ankita Ahuja, AAG, Haryana accepts notice on behalf of the State. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant material placed on record. 6. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the heavy recovery effected from the truck, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required in this case. Therefore, no ground is made out to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 7. Accordingly, the instant petition stands dismissed. (H.S.GREWAL) May 21, 2025 JUDGE poonam Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No POONAM RATHORE 2025.05.23 16:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh