Decided on November 23,2006



- (1.)Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(2.)By the impugned order, the High Court, while granting anticipatory bail to the accused Navdeep Singh, has given the following directions:
"Before parting with this order, it has become necessary to direct DIG, Ferozepur to proceed against ASI Jaswinder Singh to initiate disciplinary proceedings under the Punjab Punishment and Appeal Rules, 1970 as well as under the Punjab Police Rules which are applicable to ASI Jaswinder Singh and also to proceed against him u/s. 58 of the NDPS Act, in view of the report submitted by SP(D), Moga that he has falsely implicated the petitioner under the Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is entitled to compensation for harassing him as the petitioner and his family members remained under mental tension and under the fear of being arrested. The petitioner remained on run and the investigating officer has tried to give chance to the other party that the father of the petitioner may not win the election of the office of Sarpanch but by the grace of God, he had won the election of Sarpanch by thumping majority and got elected on 19.06.2003. Before granting any relief of compensation, a notice be issued to ASI Jaswinder Singh to appear and file reply. DIG, Ferozepur, is also directed to post ASI Jaswinder Singh on a post on which there is no public dealing till disciplinary proceedings are pending against him."

(3.)From the aforesaid directions it would appear that three directions have been given; firstly, for initiating departmental proceeding against the appellant, secondly, for launching a criminal prosecution case u/s. 58 of the NDPS Act and, thirdly, for issuing notice against the appellant for payment of compensation to accused Navdeep Singh. It appears that pursuant to the aforesaid directions departmental proceeding has been initiated against the appellant and a substantive criminal case has been registered. So far the matter regarding compensation to accused Navdeep Singh is concerned, no final order has been passed by the High Court on the same. In our view, while granting anticipatory bail the High Court could have recorded a tentative finding regarding veracity or otherwise of the prosecution case, but it could not have virtually passed an order of acquittal. In our view while granting anticipatory bail, the High Court was not justified in giving directions for initiating departmental proceeding and launching a criminal prosecution against the appellant u/s. 58 of the NDPS Act. It was also not justified in issuing notice to the appellant as to why compensation be not paid to the accused Navdeep Singh. As a matter of fact these directions could have been given by the Court upon conclusion of trial and not at this juncture.

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.