(Kurian Joseph and Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, JJ.)
Satpal Singh _______________________________________ Petitioner
v.
The State of Punjab _______________________________ Respondent
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 8184/2017, decided on February 7, 2018
(SLP (Crl) No. 8184/2017 Alongwith IA No. 109155/2017-Exemption From Filing O.T. and IA No. 118588/2017-Permission to File Additional Documents is to Be Listed Before Hon’ble Court.)
The Order of the court was delivered by
Order
1. Put up tomorrow i.e. on 08.02.2018 along with SLP (Crl) Diary No. 4152/2018.
2. Additional documents, if any, are permitted to be filed within one week.
3. This is a case where this Court had issued notice to the State as to why the State had not taken steps for cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted to the co-accused by a coordinate Bench of the High Court by order dated 21.09.2017.
4. When the matter came up before this Court on 22.11.2017, the following order was passed:—
“Issue notice, returnable in three weeks.
In the meantime, the respondent-State is directed to clarify as to whether any steps have been taken for challenging the orders granting anticipatory bail to the co-accused in the same case.”
5. When the matter was posted on 15.12.2017, there was no response and again the matter came up for hearing on 17.01.2018 and was directed to be posted on 18.01.2018.
6. On 18.1.2018, on coming to know from the instruction of the learned counsel for the State that no steps have been taken, this Court passed the following order:—
“Seeking, among other things, parity the petitioner has sought for anticipatory bail. Noticing the anticipatory bail granted in an NDPS case to the co-accused, this Court by order dated 22.11.2017, while issuing notice passed the following order:—
“Issue notice, returnable in three weeks.
In the meantime, the respondent-State is directed to clarify as to whether any steps have been taken for challenging the orders granting anticipatory bail to the co-accused in the same case.”
It is also relevant to note that in the impugned order dated 4.10.2017 the learned Judge has noted that the coordinate Bench which granted anticipatory bail to the co-accused had omitted to take note of Section 37 of NDPS Act, 1985.
Thereafter, the matter was posted on 15.12.2017 and the counsel sought three weeks’ time to file counter affidavit, which was granted.
Today, learned counsel for the respondent/State submits that the counter affidavit is ready and the same may be permitted to be filed during the course of the week.
Permission is granted.
At paragraph 6 of the counter affidavit it is stated “… no decision for challenging the order dated 21.09.2017, whereby anticipatory bail was granted to co-accused, namely, Beant Singh and Gurvinder Singh has been taken by the Government”.
Learned counsel for the respondent/State submits that the process takes some time, since the file has to pass through many hands.
We direct the Secretary (Law) or the Secretary concerned in the Government dealing with the matters regarding sanction to be present before this Court with the records pertaining to the sanction for cancellation of the bail granted to the co-accused by order dated 21.09.2017, on the next date of hearing.
Post on 07.02.2018.”
7. Today, Mr. N.S. Kalsi, Additional Chief Secretary, Home Affairs and Justice, along with Superintendent of Police, Patiala and the other police officers concerned are present in Court.
8. It is reported that the matter came to the notice of the Additional Chief Secretary, Home Affairs and Justice, only on 25.01.2018 and within a week steps have been taken to file a special leave petition and the same has been filed.
9. We direct the Additional Chief Secretary, Home Affairs and Justice, to conduct an appropriate inquiry as to who are the officials/officers involved in taking such a lackadaisical attitude despite the High Court in the impugned order pointing out that the order granting bail to the co-accused was not proper.
10. Needless to say that the Report shall contain names of the officers who, despite three postings before this Court, were not vigilant in not bringing up the matter before the Government. The Report, as above, shall be filed within four weeks from today.
11. Post after four weeks.
12. The presence of the officers is dispensed with until further orders.
———
