Harpal vs State Of Haryana
2023 Latest Caselaw 2022 P&H

CRM-M 29843 of 2022                                                 #1#

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                     CHANDIGARH

205
                                       CRM-M 29843 of 2022
                                       Date of Decision: 31.01.2023

Harpal                                                             ......Petitioner
                                    Versus
State of Haryana                                                 .....Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURBIR SINGH.

Present: Mr. Dhruv Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Karan Sharma, DAG, Haryana.

GURBIR SINGH, J (ORAL) The petitioner has filed the present petition praying for grant of

regular bail in case FIR No.118 dated 25.03.2022, under Section 18 of

NDPS Act (Section 29 of the NDPS Act was added later on), registered at

Police Station Parao Ambala Cantt. District Ambala.

Learned counsel for the petitioner states that no recovery is

effected from from the petitioner. He has been falsely implicated in this case

on the basis of disclosure statement made by co-accused Neeraj, who is

already granted bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated

29.09.2022 in CRM-M-36117-2022. He further submits that the recovery in

this case is slightly more than the commercial quantity. There is only

disclosure statement against the petitioner made by the co-accused which

has no evidentiary value. He relies on judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme

Court 'Tofan Singh Vs. State of Tamil Nadu (2021) 4 (SCCI)'.

Status report by way of affidavit of Anil Kumar, HPS, Deputy

Superintendent of Police, Ambala Cantt. District Ambala, on behalf of

respondent-State, is filed in Court today. The same is taken on record.

Learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the application.

                                      1 of 2

 CRM-M 29843 of 2022                                              #2#

He submits that contraband of 2 kg 600 grams of opium has been recovered

from the driver seat of car of co-accused and as per disclosure statement,

petitioner had supplied 1 kg 600 grams of opium out of the total quantity

recovered. He further submits that the challan has been presented in this

case.

Heard.

In view of the above, without commenting anything on the

merits of the case and taking into account the fact that no recovery is

effected from the petitioner, challan is already presented in this case, since

the trial is not likely to be concluded in near future as also the fact that he

was named on the basis of disclosure statement made by the co-accused

that he has purchased part of the recovered opium from the petitioner, in my

opinion, no useful purpose would be served by detaining the petitioner

behind bars any further. The petition, as such, is allowed. Petitioner is

ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to

the satisfaction of learned Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned.

If any attempt whatsoever is made by the petitioner to

contact/threaten/intimidate any member of the complainant's family (also

the family of the petitioner), the complainant/State shall be at liberty to

move an application for cancellation of bail granted vide this order.

                                                 (GURBIR SINGH)
January 31, 2023                                    JUDGE
jyoti3
            Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
            Whether Reportable: Yes/No




                                      2 of 2