Honey Sehgal vs State Of Punjab
2021 Latest Caselaw 1802 P&H

CRM-M- 18259-2021 (O&M)                                                      -1-



    IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND
                HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

                                          CRM-M- 18259-2021 (O&M)
                                          Date of Decision: May 24, 2021


Honey Sehgal


                                                                  ... Petitioner

                                        Versus

State of Punjab


                                                                ... Respondent

CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR

Present:-   Mr. Randeep Singh Waraich, Advocate
            for the petitioner.

            Mr. H. S. Sitta, AAG, Punjab.
                         ***

JAISHREE THAKUR, J. (Oral)

This is a petition that has been filed for grant of regular bail to

the petitioner in case FIR No. 32 dated 01.03.2021 under Sections 22, 25,

29,61, 85 of the NDPS Act registered at Police Station Dakha, Disstrict

Ludhiana.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the

petitioner has been wrongly implicated in the present case and has been

nominated as an accused on the basis of a disclosure statement made by one

Mandeep Singh alias Manga, who had been nominated as an accused by one

Sukhpal Singh in his disclosure statement. It is contended that said Sukhpal

Singh was named in the FIR and was arrested on the spot. It is argued that

1 of 3

CRM-M- 18259-2021 (O&M) -2-

the challan was presented without being accompanied by the FSL report,

therefore, it would be deemed to be an incomplete challan. Learned counsel

relies upon the judgment titled as Inderjit Singh Ladi vs. State of Punjab,

2014 (3), RCR (Criminal) 953 to support his arguments. It is contended

that the petitioner is in custody and the trial is likely to take some time to

conclude, therefore, prayer is made for concession of interim/regular bail to

the petitioner.

Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent-

State, on instructions from the Investigating Officer, opposes the grant of

bail to the petitioner on the ground that there is a huge recovery of 25000

tablets of Tramadol Hydrochloride along with a vehicle and cash of Rs. 02

lac from the petitioner herein, however, he does not dispute the fact that the

FSL report is awaited.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and in view of the

restricted working of the Courts due to pandemic COVID-19 situation and

the law laid down in judgment rendered in Inderjeet Singh @ Laddi and

others vs. State of Punjab (supra) when the trial will commence only after

receipt of the FSL report, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the

petitioner behind bars. At this stage, without commenting on the merits of

the case, the instant petition is disposed of with a direction that the

petitioner will be released on interim regular bail on his execution of

adequate personal and surety bonds to the satisfaction of concerned trial

Court/Duty Magistrate, till the FSL report is received. The petitioner shall

submit an undertaking before the trial court/Duty Magistrate along with his

bail/surety bonds that he will surrender before the trial court on receiving

2 of 3

CRM-M- 18259-2021 (O&M) -3-

the FSL report.

However, it will be open for the prosecution to apply for

cancellation of bail, if the petitioner is found misusing the concession of

bail, in any manner.

                                              (JAISHREE THAKUR)
24 May, 2021                                       JUDGE
seema


Whether speaking/reasoned                            Yes/No
Whether reportable                                   Yes/No




                               3 of 3