Punjab-Haryana High Court
Surinder @ Laddi vs State Of Punjab on 9 April, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:047862
2024:PHHC:047862
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
102 CRM-M-17546-2024
Date of Decision : April 09, 2024
SURINDER @ LADDI -PETITIONER
V/S
STATE OF PUNJAB -RESPONDENT
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI
Present: Mr. Kamal Narula, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Pardeep Bajaj, D.A.G., Punjab.
***
KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (ORAL)
1. Through the instant petition, as instituted under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C., the petitioner seeks the concession of anticipatory bail, in FIR No.12 dated 12.02.2024, under Section 21 of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985 (Section 29 of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985, added subsequently) registered at P.S. Zira, District Ferozepur.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has no concern whatsoever with the alleged recovery of 25 grams of heroin, which indeed has been effected from co-accused Dalvir Singh. Moreover, when the allegedly recovered heroin falls in the category of "non-commercial quantity", therefore, the statutory bar as engrafted in Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985, is not applicable in the present case. The name of the petitioner surfaced for the first time ever only in the disclosure statement, as suffered by the co-accused Dalvir Singh, during the course of investigation, whereupon, he has been arrayed as an accused in the instant FIR. He contests the evidentiary vigor of the said disclosure statement, on the ground that, the same was suffered by the co-accused (supra) while being in police custody.
3. The record reveals that the petitioner has been nominated as an 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 11-04-2024 22:12:48 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:047862 CRM-M-17546-2024 2 2024:PHHC:047862 accused under Section 29 of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985, on the basis of DDR No.32 dated 14.02.2024. It further erupts from the record that the petitioner is involved in four other criminal cases, i.e. two cases under the Excise Act and two cases under the N.D.P.S. Act.
4. Though the alleged recovery of heroin, as effected from the co- accused (supra), undisputedly falls in the category of "non-commercial quantity", however, the hereinabove extracted criminal antecedents of the petitioner impel this Court to draw an inference that the petitioner is a habitual offender, who indulges in trade of narcotics time and again. Now, insofar as evidentiary worth of the disclosure statement of co-accused (supra) is concerned, the same can only be considered and ascertained at the appropriate stage of trial.
5. Therefore, this Court does not deem it a fit case to grant the extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. To reach at this conclusion, this Court also garners strength from the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in case titled as "The State of Haryana Versus Samarth Kumar", 2022 (3) RCR (Criminal) 991. Consequently, the asked for relief of anticipatory bail is declined to the petitioner and the petition is accordingly dismissed.
6. However, anything observed hereinabove shall neither be construed to have any bearing on the outcome of the trial, nor the trial Court concerned shall be influenced by any of the observations recorded herein.
(KULDEEP TIWARI)
April 09, 2024 JUDGE
devinder
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether Reportable : Yes/No
2 of 2
::: Downloaded on - 11-04-2024 22:12:48 :::