Hardeep Singh @ Golu vs State Of Punjab
2023 Latest Caselaw 9497 P&H

                                                        Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:085319




CRM-M-23914-2023 (O&M)                     -1-   2023:PHHC:085319


      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                     CHANDIGARH

                                                 CRM-M-23914-2023 (O&M)
                                                 Date of Decision: 06.07.2023


Hardeep Singh @ Golu
                                                                    ....Petitioner(s)
                                    Versus

State of Punjab

                                                                .....Respondent(s)


CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASGURPREET SINGH PURI

Present:     Ms. Gagan Mohini, Advocate, for the petitioner.

             Mr. Rajiv Verma, DAG, Punjab.

                         ****

JASGURPREET SINGH PURI, J. (Oral)

1. The present petition has been filed under Section 439 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in

FIR No. 22 dated 23.02.2021, under Section 22 of NDPS Act, registered at

Police Station Sadar Khanna, District Ludhiana.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the

petitioner is in custody for 2 years and 4 months and as per the allegations,

the police party had some information and they had stopped the

motorcycle on which the petitioner was a pillion rider and other co-

accused namely Kewal Khan was driving the motorcycle and on seeing the

police party, they had thrown away the polythene bag in the fields and in

this way, no recovery was effected from either of the accused. Learned

counsel further submitted that in the present case the other co-accused

1 of 3

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:085319

CRM-M-23914-2023 (O&M) -2- 2023:PHHC:085319

namely Kewal Khan who was driving the motorcycle has been extended the

benefit of regular bail by this Court in CRM-M-44825-2022 vide order

dated 05.05.2023 and so far as the present petitioner is concerned, he is also

at parity with the aforesaid co-accused. She while referring to the aforesaid

order passed by this Court, submitted that bail was granted to the aforesaid

co-accused primarily on the ground that after the framing of the charges on

22.10.2021 not even a single witness has been examined till date. More than

16 times the matter was adjourned out of which 4 times bailable warrants

were issued against the prosecution witnesses but no prosecution witness

has been examined and even till date no prosecution witness has been

examined. She further submitted that this Court had considered the judgment

of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Versus Central Bureau

of Investigation and another [2022 (10) SCC 51] and also a latest judgment

of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mohd. Muslim @ Hussain Versus State

(NCT of Delhi) [2023 AIR (SC) 1648] and while referring to the aforesaid

judgments it was so held by this Court that the bar contained under Section 37

of the NDPS Act will not apply and the aforesaid co-accused was granted

bail by passing a detailed order in the light of Article 21 of the Constitution of

India. She submitted that the petitioner is exactly at parity with the aforesaid

co-accused and therefore, the petitioner may be considered for the grant of

regular bail.

3. On the other hand, Mr. Rajiv Verma, learned DAG, Punjab has

submitted that so far as the custody period of the petitioner is concerned, the

same is correct and till date no prosecution witness has been examined despite

the fact that the charges were framed way back on 22.10.2021. So far as the

parity of the petitioner with the other co-accused is concerned, the same has

2 of 3

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:085319

CRM-M-23914-2023 (O&M) -3- 2023:PHHC:085319

not been disputed by learned State counsel.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

5. The petitioner has already faced incarceration for 2 years and 4

months and till date no prosecution witness has been examined. This Court

while granting bail to the other co-accused, namely, Kewal Khan has dealt in

detail the position with regard to delayed trial of the present case while

referring to the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court as aforesaid and

granted bail to the other co-accused in the light of Article 21 of the

Constitution of India. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, this

Court is of the view that the petitioner is at parity with the aforesaid co-accused

and therefore, he is entitled for the grant of regular bail.

6. Consequently, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner shall

be released on regular bail subject to furnishing bail bonds/surety to the

satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.

7. However, anything observed hereinabove shall not be treated as

an expression of opinion on merits of the case and is meant for the purpose

of deciding the present petition only.

06.07.2023                                        (JASGURPREET SINGH PURI)
rakesh                                                   JUDGE
         Whether speaking                     :      Yes/No
         Whether reportable                   :      Yes/No




                                                              Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:085319

                                     3 of 3