The single judge bench of Justice Anoop Chitkara of the Punjab and Haryana High court in the case of Ravinder Singh @ravi vs the state of Punjab granted bail to the accused on the ground that the quantity of the contraband is less than the commercial quantity.
BRIEF FACTS
The factual matrix of the case is that the accused was arrested for violating the provisions of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act), and now the present application is filed under section 439 crpc for seeking bail on the ground that the quantity found was less than the commercial quantity and the rigorous punishment under section 37 of the NDPS act would not be made in this case.
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contended that the petitioner and his family will suffer irreparable harm as a result of the pre-trial incarceration.
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the state contended that according to the given criminal past, the accused is likely to indulge in crime again once released on bail.
COURT’S OBSERVATION
The hon'ble court relied upon the judgments titled, Maulana Mohd Amir Rashadi v. the State of U.P and Paramjeet Singh v. State of Punjab and thus stated that the previous criminal history of the petitioner is not being considered strictly at this stage as a factor for denying bail. Further, the quantity allegedly involved in this case is not commercial. Given this, the rigors of S. 37 of the NDPS Act do not apply in the present case. There is no evidence that the drug money is the proceeds of which drug and the evidence to term it as drug money is lacking at this stage.
In the case of Sami Ullaha v Superintendent Narcotic Control Bureau, the Hon’ble Supreme Court holds that in intermediate quantity, the rigors of the provisions of Section 37 may not be justified.
Given the accused's age and other considerations unique to this case, it may be fair to give the petitioner one last chance to change her mind. Thus, the petitioner's prior criminal history is not being carefully regarded as a consideration for granting bail at this stage, and considering the facts indicated above and other factors unique to this case, prolonged pre-trial imprisonment may not be warranted at this stage.
The hon'ble court granted bail to the accused while relying upon the judgments titled Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v State of Punjab, Kalyan Chandra Sarkar v Rajesh Ranjan @ Pappu Yadav, State of Rajasthan v Balchand, Gudikanti Narasimhulu v Public Prosecutor, Prahlad Singh Bhati v NCT, Delhi, and Dataram Singh v State of Uttar Pradesh.
CASE NAME- Ravinder Singh @ravi vs the state of Punjab
CORUM- Justice Anoop Chitkara
DATED- 26.08.22
CITATION- CRM-M-21013-2022
Read Judgmemt @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
