High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

Bhagel Singh vs State Of Punjab And Others on 23 August, 2011

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Bhagel Singh vs State Of Punjab And Others on 23 August, 2011
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                AT CHANDIGARH



                   Criminal Writ Petition No.1315 of 2011
                                   Date of Decision : Augst 23, 2011


Bhagel Singh
                                                       ....Petitioner
                             Versus
State of Punjab and others
                                                  .....Respondents


CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN

Present :Mr. S.S. Rana, Advocate

        Mr. P.S. Paul, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.


T.P.S. MANN, J. (Oral)

It is not in dispute that Ravinder Singh, the alleged

detenu, has already been got released by the Warrant Officer.

As per the report of the Warrant Officer dated 6.7.2011,

the Assistant Excise and Taxation Commissioner, S.B.S. Nagar

had addressed letter dated 22.6.2011 to the SHO, Police Station

Sadar Nawanshahr that a fine of Rs.50,000/- had been imposed

upon the alleged detenu on account of recovery of 15 boxes of

high speed whisky. As the said amount had to be deposited by

Ravinder Singh, he was summoned to the Police Station so as to

impress upon him for depositing the same. However, in the reply
Criminal Writ Petition No.1315 of 2011 -2-

filed on behalf of respondents No.1 to 4 it had been mentioned

that Ravinder Singh was summoned to the Police Station by

issuing a notice under Section 160 Cr.P.C. as he was required to

be produced before the Assistant Excise and Taxation

Commissioner, Nawanshahr for the purpose of his production

before the Magistrate in the event of his not depositing the

amount of fine to be imposed by the Assistant Excise and

Taxation Officer.

It is clear from the above that when the alleged detenu

was recovered by the Warrant Officer, no fine of Rs.50,000/- had

been imposed upon him. The fact remains that he was required

to be produced before the Assistant Excise and Taxation Officer

to either pay the fine or face the criminal proceedings.

In view of the above, no further orders are required to be

passed in the present petition. The same is, accordingly,

disposed of.





                                               ( T.P.S.MANN )
August 23, 2011                                     JUDGE
satish