Sandeep Singh vs State Of Punjab
2023 Latest Caselaw 8555 P&H

                                                    Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:078846




                                                               2023:PHHC:078846


CRM-M-8202-2023                                                                   ::1::



 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

                                                CRM-M-8202-2023 (O & M)
                                                Date of decision: 30.05.2023


Sandeep Singh                                                     .... Petitioner

           V/s

State of Punjab                                                  ...Respondent


CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI

Present:     Mr. J.S. Dhaliwal, Advocate,
             for the petitioner.

             Ms. Ramta K Chaudhary, DAG, Punjab.

                 *****

JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. (Oral)

The prayer in the present petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is

for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.148 dated

22.05.2021 under Sections 22, 61 and 85 of the NDPS Act registered at

Police Station Sadar Mansa, District Mansa, Punjab.

2. The brief facts of the case are that while the police party was on

checking duty for suspected persons and had set-up a nakabandi at the Canal

Bridge of Village Bhaini Bagha, then one shorn-haired person was seen

coming on a motorcycle bearing registration No.PB-44 B-8901 make

Passion Pro of black and blue colour from the side of Burj Hari. He had

kept a plastic bag of black colour on the tank of the motorcycle. When he

was asked to stop, he got perplexed and tried to turn back, but he was

apprehended and the search of his bag revealed 300 strips of intoxicant

tablets i.e. each strip containing 10/10 intoxicant tablets i.e. total 3000

1 of 4

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:078846

2023:PHHC:078846

CRM-M-8202-2023 ::2::

intoxicant tablets make Celcidal-100 SR (Tramadol Hydrochloride) having

batch No.21-B-T137, MFG May 2021, Ex. April 2023 belonging to

company PP Pharma-A-1, Park Plaza (E), Mumbai, leading to the

registration of the present FIR.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that he had been

falsely implicated in the present case. The mandatory provisions of search

and seizure under the NDPS Act had not been complied with. As the

petitioner was in custody since 22.05.2021 and only a few of the 10

prosecution witnesses had been examined so far, he was entitled to the

concession of bail. Reliance is placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in 'Nitish Adhikary @ Bapan versus 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 and

followed by this Court in the case of 'Balraj Singh versus State of Punjab

(CRM-M-57386-2022 decided on 14.12.2022)'.

4. The learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, contends

that commercial quantity of the contraband had been recovered from the

petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner was not entitled to the grant of

concession of bail in view of the bar contained under Section 37 of the

NDPS Act. He, however, concedes that the petitioner is in custody since

22.05.2021, was a first-time offender and some of the prosecution witnesses

still remain to be examined.

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

6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Nitish Adhikary @

Bapan Vs. The State of West Bengal SLP (Crl.) Nos.5769/2022 Decided on

01.08.2022 held as under:-

2 of 4

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:078846

2023:PHHC:078846

CRM-M-8202-2023 ::3::

"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 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."

This Court in the case of Balraj Singh Versus State of Punjab,

CRM-M-57386-2022, decided on 14.12.2022 has followed the dictum laid

down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and granted bail to the petitioner

therein after he had undergone total custody of 01 year and 06 months.

7. In the instant case, the FIR pertains to 22.05.2021. The

petitioner is stated to be in custody since that date. Some of the prosecution

witnesses still remain to be examined and the petitioner is a first-time

3 of 4

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:078846

2023:PHHC:078846

CRM-M-8202-2023 ::4::

offender. In this view of the matter, the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS

Act can be relaxed to an extent in view of the salutary provisions under

Article 21 of the Constitution of India which provides for the right to a

speedy Trial and the case of the petitioner can be considered for the grant of

concession of bail.

8. Thus, without commenting upon the merits of the case, the

present petition is allowed and the petitioner-Sandeep Singh is ordered to be

released on bail to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty Magistrate

concerned.

9. The petitioner shall appear on the first Monday of every month

before the police station concerned till the conclusion of the trial and furnish

an affidavit each time that he is not involved in any case/crime other than the

present one.

10. In addition, the petitioner (or someone on his behalf) shall

prepare an FDR in the sum of Rs.50,000/- and deposit the same with the

Trial Court. The same would be liable to be forfeited as per law in case of

the absence of the petitioner from trial without sufficient cause.

                                                  ( JASJIT SINGH BEDI)
                                                         JUDGE
May 30, 2023
sukhpreet
                      Whether speaking/reasoned          : Yes/No

                      Whether reportable                 : Yes/No




                                                      Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:078846

                                  4 of 4