Punjab-Haryana High Court
Rajinder Kumar @Happy vs State Of Punjab on 18 January, 2023
CRM-M-13618-2021 # 1#
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.
CRM-M-13618-2021
Date of Decision:-18.01.2023
Rajinder Kumar @ Happy.
......Petitioner.
Versus
State of Punjab.
......Respondent.
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI
Present:- Ms. Kanika Ahuja, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr. Kirat Singh Sidhu, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.
***
JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. (ORAL)
The Prayer in this petition under Section 439 Cr.PC is for the
grant of regular bail in case FIR No.251 dated 25.11.2020 under Sections
22/61/85 of NDPS Act registered at Police Station City, Phagwara.
2. The brief facts of the case are that while the police party was on
patrolling duty they saw a clean-shaved person carrying two bags in his
hands. On seeing the police party he started walking briskly. On being
apprehended and being asked his name and address, he disclosed his name
as Rajinder Sing @ Happy (petitioner). Pursuant thereto the recovery of
14,000 tablets of Clavidol (Tramadol Hydrochloride) 20 litres of
intoxicating liquid along with 570 vials came to be effected from him.
3. The Counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has
been falsely implicated in the present case. No independent witness was
1 of 4
CRM-M-13618-2021 # 2#
joined during the course of search and seizure. The mandatory provisions
of the NDPS Act had not been complied with. Since the petitioner was in
custody since 25.11.2020 and only 01 out of 19 prosecution witnesses had
been examined so far, the petitioner was entitled to the grant of bail more so
when he had clean antecedents. Reliance is placed on the judgment of
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 a
huge quantity of contraband has been recovered from the petitioner. As
such he was not entitled to the grant of bail in view of Section 37 of the
NDPS Act. He however, does not deny the fact that the petitioner is a first
time offender and is in custody since the last more than 02 years. He also
admits the fact that there is no other case registered against the petitioner.
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
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
2 of 4
CRM-M-13618-2021 # 3#
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 since 25.11.2020.
Only 01 out of 19 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far. The
petitioner is a first time offender with no other case under the NDPS Act
registered against him. In such a situation the provisions of Section 37 can
be diluted to an 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-Rajinder Kumar @ Happy son of Sh. Tarsem Chand is ordered
to be released on 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
3 of 4
CRM-M-13618-2021 # 4#
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
