Punjab-Haryana High Court
Mani Ram vs State Of Haryana on 12 April, 2023
2023:PHHC:050082
In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana
At Chandigarh
CRM-M-33371-2022 (O&M)
Date of Decision:-12.4.2023
Mani Ram ... Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana ... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL
Present:- Mr. Satnam Singh Gill, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Gurmeet Singh, AAG, Haryana,
assisted by ASI Ram Kumar.
*****
GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J. (Oral)
1. The petitioner seeks grant of regular bail in a case registered vide FIR No.
117, dated 12.8.2020 at Police Station Jakhal, District Fatehabad, under
Sections 22(c) and 27-A of Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act.
2. As per the case of prosecution, the petitioner was apprehended by the police
on 12.8.2020 while in possession of 400 strips (4000 tablets) of 'Tramadol
Hydrochloride'.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely
implicated in the present case. It has further been submitted that the petitioner
has been behind bars for a substantial period of more than 2 years and 6
months and since the trial is proceeding at snail's pace as only 1 PW i.e. ASI
Dharampal out of the cited 16 PWs has been examined till date, the petitioner
cannot be kept behind bars for an indefinite period. Learned counsel for the
petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is not involved in any other case.
PANKAJ KAKKAR
2023.04.12 14:59
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
CRM-M-33371-2022 (O&M) (2) 2023:PHHC:050082
4. Opposing the petition, learned State counsel has submitted that since it is a
case, wherein the petitioner was caught red-handed while in possession of
'commercial' quantity of contraband, no case for grant of bail is made out.
Learned State counsel has, however, informed that the petitioner as on date
has been behind bars since the last more than 2 years and 6 months. It has
also been informed that the petitioner is not involved in any other case.
5. This Court has considered the rival submissions addressed before this Court.
6. Since the petitioner seeks grant of bail mainly on account of long custody, it
is apposite to refer to a few judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court in this
regard wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court has granted the concession of bail
solely on ground of long custody :-
Case Number Date of Title of case Period which the
Decision accused had undergone
when granted bail by
Hon'ble Supreme Court.
Criminal 07.02.2020 Chitta Biswas @ Subhas Vs. 1 year and 7 months
Appeal No. the State of West Bengal
245/2020
Criminal 12.10.2020 Amit Singh Moni Vs. State of 2 years and 7 months
Appeal No. Himachal Pradesh
668/2020
Special Leave 01.08.2022 Nitish Adhikary @ Bapan Vs. 1 year and 7 months
to Appeal the State of West Bengal
(Crl.) No.
5769/2022
Special Leave 04.08.2022 Shariful Islam @ Sarif Vs. 1 year and 6 months
to Appeal the State of West Bengal
(Crl.) No.
4173 of 2022
Criminal 05.08.2022 Gopal Krishna Patra @ 2 years 1 month and 17
Appeal No. Gopalrusma Vs. Union of days
1169 of 2022 India
Special Leave 22.08.2022 Mohammad Salman Hanif About 2 years
to Appeal Shaikh Vs. the State of
(Crl.) No. Gujarat
5530-2022
Criminal 22.11.2022 Karnail Singh Vs. The State 1 Year and 8 months
Appeal No. of Odisha
2027-2022
PANKAJ KAKKAR
2023.04.12 14:59
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
CRM-M-33371-2022 (O&M) (3) 2023:PHHC:050082
Special Leave 25.11.2022 Karim Adaldar Vs. The State 10 months
to Appeal of West Bengal
(Crl.) No.
8653-2022
7. Hon'ble Supreme Court in yet another judgment dated 25.1.2023 arising out
of SLP No.6690-2022 titled Dheeraj Kumar Shukla Vs. State of Uttar
Pradesh has granted bail in a case registered under the NDPS Act where the
accused alongwith co-accused was found in possession of 'commercial'
quantity of 'Ganja' and had been behind bars since the last two and a half
years while observing that in the absence of any criminal antecedents, the
conditions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act could be dispensed with at that
stage, particularly when there was delay in conclusion of trial.
8. Having regard to the fact that the petitioner has been behind bars since the
last more than 2 years and 6 months and is not shown to be involved in any
other case, this Court is of the opinion that provisions of Section 37 of NDPS
Act at this stage can be dispensed with in the present case.
9. The petition, as such, is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released
on regular bail on his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of
learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned.
10. It is, however, directed that in case the petitioner is found to be indulging in
similar offence again, the prosecution would be at liberty to move an
application for cancellation of bail before this Court.
12.4.2023 ( Gurvinder Singh Gill )
pankaj Judge
Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No
Whether Reportable Yes / No
PANKAJ KAKKAR
2023.04.12 14:59
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
