Gurmail Singh vs State Of Haryana
2022 Latest Caselaw 2044 P&H

CRM-M-11699-2022                                                          -1-
210
      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
                  AT CHANDIGARH
                                         ****

CRM-M-11699-2022 Date of Decision: 24.03.2022 Gurmail Singh ..... Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ..... Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI

Present: Mr. Kushager Goyal, Advocate, for Mr. Lalit Kumar, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Raman Kumar Sharma, Additional A.G., Haryana.

*****

HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI J. (ORAL)

The petitioner is seeking regular bail in FIR No.7, dated

08.01.2020, under Section 22-C of the NDPS Act, registered at Police

Station Civil Line, District Sirsa.

Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that no recovery has

been effected from the petitioner and he has been involved in the present

case only on the basis of the disclosure statement of co-accused, namely

Karnail Singh @ Kelu, from whom the recovery of contraband was effected.

Learned counsel further submits that the said co-accused has already been

extended the concession of regular bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court

while passing order dated 21.01.2022 in CRM-M-20141-2021, therefore

even otherwise, the petitioner is entitled for the grant of regular bail on the

ground of parity.

Learned State counsel submits that in the present case, the main

accused, namely Karnail Singh @ Kelu, from whom the contraband was

1 of 3

recovered, has disclosed in his statement that the contraband recovered from

him was purchased from the petitioner, therefore, the petitioner cannot

escape the liability. Though, learned State counsel concedes the fact that a

co-ordinate Bench of this Court, while passing order in CRM-M-20141-

2021, has already extended the concession of regular bail to the said co-

accused.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone

through the record with their able assistance.

Keeping in view the facts that no recovery of the contraband

was effected from the petitioner and that he has been involved in the present

case only on the basis of disclosure statement of the said co-accused,

namely Karnail Singh @ Kelu, along with the fact that nothing has been

produced before this Court to substantiate the said disclosure statement of

the co-accused, in light of the settled principle of law as laid down by the

Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in its judgment passed in Criminal Appeal

No.152 of 2013, titled as "Tofan Singh Vs. State of Tamil Nadu", the

petitioner is entitled for the grant of regular bail, especially in view of the

facts that even the allegations alleged in the said disclosure statement of the

co-accused are yet to be proved during the trial. Learned counsel for the

petitioner has undertaken before this Court that the petitioner will maintain

good conduct and will not influence the trial or the witnesses in any manner.

Even otherwise, once the main accused, from whom the

contraband was recovered, has already been extended the concession of

regular bail by a co-ordinate Bench while passing order dated 21.01.2022 in

CRM-M-20141-2021, the petitioner, who is on a better footing than the said

co-accused, becomes entitled for the grant of regular bail on the ground of

2 of 3

parity.

In view of the above and without commenting upon the merits

of the case, it is directed that the petitioner be released on regular bail,

subject to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.

However, it is made clear that anything observed herein shall

not be construed to be an expression of any opinion on the merits of the

case.

24.03.2022                               (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI)
Apurva                                           JUDGE


             1. Whether speaking/reasoned :           Yes

             2. Whether reportable             :      Yes




                                3 of 3