Punjab-Haryana High Court
Jaswant Singh @ Bant Singh vs State Of Punjab on 6 November, 2023
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:141260
CRM-M-1589-2023 2023:PHHC:141260
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
CRM-M-1589-2023
Date of Decision: 6.11.2023
Jaswant Singh @ Bant Singh
....Petitioner
VERSUS
State of Punjab
....Respondent
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KARAMJIT SINGH
Present: Mr. Rajdeep Singh Gill, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Vinay Kumar Gupta, AAG, Punjab
*******
KARAMJIT SINGH, J.
Prayer in this 2nd petition under Section 439 of Code of
Criminal Procedure is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR
No.08 dated 21.1.2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections
15 and 18 of NDPS Act at Police Station Dirba, District Sangrur.
2. As per prosecution version, petitioner-Jaswant Singh @ Bant
Singh and co-accused Gurpreet Singh @ Lakha were apprehended by the
police on the basis of secret information on 21.1.2022 while the petitioner
was driving truck No.PB07-AC-5257 and on checking of the said truck,
commercial quantity of contraband was recovered and the petitioner was
arrested at the spot along with his co-accused.
3. Counsel for the petitioner inter alia submits that the petitioner
has been falsely implicated in the present case and is in custody for the last
more than 1 year and 9 months and that the trial is not progressing ahead. It
is further contended that the petitioner has already been acquitted in another
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:141260
CRM-M-1589-2023 2023:PHHC:141260
case which was registered against him under NDPS Act by the Court
concerned vide judgment dated 2.8.2018 and the petitioner is having no
other criminal history and that it will take considerable time for the trial to
terminate. So, prayer is made that the present petition be allowed.
4. Present petition is resisted by the State counsel who submits
that commercial quantity of contraband was recovered from the petitioner
and his co-accused while both of them were travelling in the truck. It is
further submitted that the trial is going on and that rigors of Section 37 of
NDPS Act are applicable to the present case. However, the State counsel
has not disputed the fact that the petitioner is in custody for the last about 1
year and 9 months and that till date, only one prosecution witness has been
examined.
5. I have considered the submissions made by the counsel for the
parties.
6. Admittedly, the petitioner is in custody since 21.1.2022 and as
per custody certificate, he was also involved in one another criminal case
under NDPS Act. However, counsel for the petitioner has produced copy of
judgment whereby the petitioner stands acquitted in the said criminal case
on 2.8.2018. It has been brought to the notice of this Court that the
prosecution is able to examine only one witness out of total 13 witnesses till
date. There is nothing on record to show that the petitioner is responsible for
delay in conclusion of the trial. In the given circumstances, delay in disposal
of the case especially when it is not the fault of the accused, the effect of
Section 37 of NDPS Act will be diluted.
7. In view of the above, without commenting on the merits of the
case, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:141260
CRM-M-1589-2023 2023:PHHC:141260
released on regular bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to
the satisfaction of the trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate
concerned.
( KARAMJIT SINGH )
JUDGE
November 6, 2023
Paritosh Kumar
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:141260
3 of 3
