Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sukhpreet Singh vs State Of Punjab on 16 December, 2023
Author: Vikas Suri
Bench: Vikas Suri
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:165020
2023:PHHC: 165020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
111+224 CRM-M-50173-2023 (O&M)
Date of decision: 16.12.2023
Sukhpreet Singh
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI
Present: Mr. Baltej Singh Sidhu, Sr. Advocate with
Mr. Divij Datt, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Hakam Singh, AAG, Punjab.
*****
FIR Dated Section/s Police Station
No.
0056 22.06.2023 22 of NDPS Act (29 of Sadar, Rupnagar, District
NDPS Act added later on) Rupnagar.
VIKAS SURI, J.
CRM-47524-2023
Learned counsel for the petitioner-applicant submits that the
present application for advancing the date of hearing of the main case
has been rendered infructuous as the said date has already elapsed.
Disposed of as infructuous.
CRM-M-50173-2023
1. Seeking regular bail, the petitioner has filed the present
1 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:165020
CRM-M-36783-2023 -2- 2023:PHHC: 158190
petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in the above captioned case.
2. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that
neither the petitioner is named in the FIR nor there is any allegation
regarding involvement of any other person as per prosecution version.
The petitioner has been implicated in the present case on the basis of
disclosure statement of co-accused Gaurav Kumar @ Happy @ Billa
who was apprehended at the spot and the alleged recovery of contraband
was effected from him. He further submits that petitioner was not
present at the spot and no recovery has been effected from him. The
petitioner is in custody since 26.06.2023. The investigation is complete;
charges have been framed; out of total 19 prosecution witnesses cited,
none has been examined so far. The conclusion of trial will take
considerable time, therefore, the petitioner be enlarged on bail.
3. Learned counsel further submits that in the light of the ratio
in Tofan Singh vs. State of Tamil Nadu, (2021) 4 SCC 1, the
confessional statement recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act is
inadmissible. Reliance has also been placed upon the Division Bench
judgment of this Court in Dharamveer and another vs. State of Punjab,
Law Finder Doc Id#2005311, to contend that in the absence of
recovery of any contraband from the petitioner, rigors of Section 37 of
NDPS Act would not apply.
4. On the other hand, learned State counsel has opposed the
present petition while placing on record custody certificate of the
petitioner dated 16.12.2023. Learned State counsel submits that
petitioner has been nominated on the basis of disclosure statement of co-
2 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:165020
CRM-M-36783-2023 -3- 2023:PHHC: 158190
accused from whom alleged recovery of 300 gms of intoxicant powder
containing Tramadol Hydrochloride, has been effected. The petitioner is
involved in another case of similar nature. However, the factual aspects
are not denied. It is not disputed on the basis of custody certificate that
petitioner is on bail in the said case since 28.07.2014.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered
the rival contentions.
6. It is not disputed that petitioner has been nominated on the
basis of disclosure statement made by co-accused Gaurav Kumar @
Happy @ Billa and except that, there is no other material to connect the
petitioner with the alleged recovery of contraband. Learned State
counsel has not been able to show any material regarding complicity of
the petitioner in the present case. Keeping in view all the aspects and the
ratio of Tofan Singh's case and Dharamveer's case (supra); petitioner
is in custody since 26.06.2023; investigation is complete; challan stands
presented; charges have been framed; out of 19 prosecution witnesses
cited, none has been examined so far; trial is at the initial stage and may
take considerable time to conclude; petitioner is on bail in other case as
mentioned in the custody certificate; and no useful purpose would be
served by keeping him behind bars for an indefinite period pending trial.
Hence, without commenting upon the merits of the case, the present
petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail
during the pendency of trial, on his furnishing bail-bond and surety to
the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.
7. It is made clear that the petitioner shall not influence the
3 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:165020
CRM-M-36783-2023 -4- 2023:PHHC: 158190
trial or prosecution witnesses in any manner directly or indirectly.
8. However, any observation made herein-above shall not be
construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
(VIKAS SURI)
December 16, 2023 JUDGE
sumit.k
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No
Whether Reportable : Yes / No
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:165020
4 of 4
