Gurmail Singh @ Gela vs State Of Haryana
2021 Latest Caselaw 1825 P&H

213
      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                     CHANDIGARH

                                           CRR-1320-2020 (O&M)
                                           Date of Decision: 27.05.2021

GURMAIL SINGH @ GELA                                           ........Petitioner
                                                       V/s.
STATE OF HARYANA                                               .....Respondent

CORAM:      HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL.

Present:    Mr. Aditya Sanghi, Advocate,
            for the petitioner.

            Ms. Tanushree Gupta, DAG, Haryana.

         ***
MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (Oral)

Instant petition is directed against the order dated 26.11.2020

passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sirsa whereby the

application filed under Section 167 (2) of the Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail

for the petitioner has been dismissed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that the

petitioner has been in custody since 25.05.2020 and only challan has been

presented till date. Hence, there is no likelihood of the trial concluding in

the near future. He further submits that no doubt the challan was presented

within the prescribed statutory period of 180 days, however, it was not

accompanied by the FSL Report. Hence, the challan was incomplete

entitling the petitioner to the grant of default bail. In support of his

submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the

Division Bench judgment in case of Inderjeet Singh @ Laddi and

others vs. State of Punjab, 2014(3) RCR (Crl.) 953.

Per contra, learned State counsel while opposing the prayer of

learned counsel for the petitioner on instructions has submitted that the

1 of 2

petitioner was found in possession of 407 grams heroine (Chhitha) wraped

in a glazed paper which falls in the commercial quantity. He however, has

not been able to controvert the factum of FSL report not having been filed

along with the challan. Still further, on a pointed query put to learned State

counsel, he has conceded that the learned Public Prosecutor did not make

any application or report to the Special Court concerned under the

provisions of Section 36(A)(4) of the NDPS Act seeking extension of time

for filing the FSL report.

Heard.

Admittedly, the challan has been presented in the Court

without the FSL report. This Court has no hesitation in holding that the

indefeasible right of the petitioner to grant of default bail under Section

167(2) read with Section 439 Cr.P.C. has accrued. This Court in

CRM-M-11271-2021 titled as Saleem @ Mulla vs. State of Haryana has

held that in cases under the NDPS Act, FSL report is decisive document,

which would link the accused with the commission of crime. In the absence

of FSL report not being a part of the challan so presented by the

prosecution, it would be deemed to be an incomplete challan, hence,

entitling the petitioner to the grant of default bail. Accordingly, present

petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail to the satisfaction

of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate. However, it is made clear that anything

observed hereinabove shall not be construed to be an expression of opinion

on the merits of the case.

May 27, 2021                                         [ MANJARI NEHRU KAUL ]
Ess Kay                                                      JUDGE
          Whether speaking / reasoned            :         Yes    /      No
          Whether Reportable                     :         Yes    /      No



                                        2 of 2