Punjab-Haryana High Court
Jagga Singh vs State Of Punjab on 18 January, 2023
CRM-M-1860-2023 # 1#
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.
CRM-M-1860-2023
Date of Decision:-18.01.2023
Jagga Singh.
......Petitioner.
Versus
State of Punjab.
......Respondent.
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI
Present:- Mr. Arjun Veer Sharma, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr. Kirat Singh Sidhu, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.
***
JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. (ORAL)
The Prayer in this second petition under Section 439 Cr.PC is
for the grant of regular bail in case FIR No.215 dated 11.07.2020 under
Sections 15, 29 (Added later on) registered at Police Station Patran, Patiala.
2. The brief facts of the case are that while the police party was on
patrolling duty secret information was received that Jagga Singh (petitioner)
Jagtar Singh @ Maana, Bhagwan Singh son of Budh Singh, Budh Singh son
of Bhajan Singh, Satgur Singh son of Budh Singh and Takha Singh son of
Shingara Singh altogether indulged in the business of Poppy Husk. They
had purchased one house in PUDA Colony, Patran where they had kept a
huge quantity of Poppy Husk. Jagga Singh was present in the house and if a
raid was conducted he could be apprehended.
Based on the said information, Jagga Singh was arrested
1 of 4
CRM-M-1860-2023 # 2#
whereas the other accused were not found at the spot. 10 Quintals 40 Kgs
of Poppy Husk was recovered. During the course of interrogation Jagga
Singh disclosed the names of the other accused.
3. The Counsel for the petitioner contends that there is non
compliance of Section 42 of the NDPS Act. The petitioner has suffered a
paralytic attack in Central Jail, Patiala and is on regular medicine. For
better treatment he ought to be granted the concession of bail. Even
otherwise, he had been in custody for the last more than 02 years and 06
months and since none of the 23 prosecution witnesses had been examined
and no other case under the NDPS Act stood registered against him, he was
entitled to the grant of bail. Reliance is placed on the judgment of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Nitish Adhikary @ Bapan Vs. The State of West
Bengal SLP (Crl.) Nos.5769/2022 Arising out of Judgment and Order
dated 04.05.2022 in CRM(NDPS) No.442/2022 Decided on 01.08.2022.
4. The Counsel for the State on the other hand contends that the
petitioner is the main accused and was arrested at the spot. A huge quantity
of contraband has been recovered and as such he is not entitled to the grant
of bail in view of the Section 37 of the NDPS Act. He however, does not
dispute the period of custody undergone by the petitioner as also the fact
that none of 23 witnesses have been examined so far.
5. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties.
6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Nitish Adhikary @ Bapan Vs.
The State of West Bengal SLP (Crl.) Nos.5769/2022 Decided on
01.08.2022 held as under:-
" As per the office report dated 29.07.2022, copy of the show
cause notice along with Special Leave Petition was supplied to the
Standing Counsel for the State of West Bengal and separate notice
2 of 4
CRM-M-1860-2023 # 3#
has been served on the State also. However, no one has entered
appearance on their behalf.
The petitioner seeks enlargement on bail in F.I.R. No. 612 of
2020 dated 17.10.2020 filed under Section 21(c) and 37 of the
NDPS 2 Act, registered at Police Station Bongaon, West Bengal.
During the course of the hearing, we are informed that the
petitioner has undergone custody for a period of 01 year and 07
months as on 09.06.2022. The trial is at a preliminary stage, as
only one witness has been examined. The petitioner does not have
any criminal antecedents.
Taking into consideration the period of sentence undergone
by the petitioner and all the attending circumstances but without
expressing any views in the merits of the case, we are inclined to
grant bail to the petitioner.
The petitioner is accordingly, directed to be released on bail
subject to him furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial
Court.
The Special Leave Petition is disposed of on the aforestated
terms.
Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of."
The aforementioned decision has been followed by this Court
in the case of Balraj Singh Vs. State of Punjab CRM-M-57386-2022
Decided on 14.12.2022.
7. In the present case the petitioner is in custody for almost 02
years and 06 months. He is a first time offender. None of the 23
prosecution witnesses have been examined so far. As such the Trial of the
present case is not likely to be concluded any time soon. In such a situation
the provisions of Section 37 can be diluted to the extent in view of Article
21 of the Constitution of India which provided for the right to a speedy
Trial.
8. Thus, without commenting on the merits of the case, the
petitioner-Jagga Singh son of Sh. Budh Singh is ordered to be released on
3 of 4
CRM-M-1860-2023 # 4#
bail subject to the satisfaction of learned CJM/Duty Magistrate, concerned.
The petitioner shall appear before the police station concerned
on the first Monday of every month till the conclusion of the trial and
inform in writing that he is not involved in any other crime other than the
present case.
In addition, the petitioner (or any person on his behalf) shall
prepare an FDR in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- and deposit the same with the
Trial Court. The same would be liable to be forfeited in accordance with law
in case of the absence of the petitioner from the Trial without sufficient
cause.
Petition stands disposed of.
( JASJIT SINGH BEDI )
JUDGE
January 18, 2023
Vinay
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
4 of 4
