Pardeep Kumar vs State Of Haryana
2023 Latest Caselaw 19330 P&H

                                                      Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:142060




      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                   AT CHANDIGARH


232                                        CRM M-54657 of 2023
                                           Date of Decision: 07.11.2023


Pardeep Kumar                                                 ...Petitioner
                                   Vs.
State of Haryana                                             ...Respondent


CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.S.SHEKHAWAT


Present :   Mr. Amrainder Singh, Advocate
            for the petitioner.

            Ms. Sheenu Sura, DAG, Haryana.

N.S.SHEKHAWAT, J. (Oral)

1. The petitioner has filed the instant petition under Section

439 of the Cr.P.C. with a prayer to grant a regular bail in case FIR

No.0244 dated 18.04.2023 registered under Sections 22(C)/61/85 of

the NDPS Act (under Section 29 of NDPS Act added lateron) at

Police Station Mujesar, District Faridabad.

2. The FIR in the present case was registered on the basis of

the secret information received by the police. In pursuance of the

secret information, co-accused Subhash was apprehended by the

police and 15 injections were recovered from him. After following the

due process of law, Subhash was arrested by the police.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the

petitioner has not been named in the FIR and has been wrongly

1 of 3

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:142060

arrested by the police on 21.04.2023, on the basis of the disclosure

statement suffered by the co-accused. While placing reliance on the

judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Tofan Singh VS.

State of Tamil Nadu, 2021(4) SCC 1, learned counsel for the

petitioner submits that the petitioner cannot be incarcerated for an

indefinite period only on the basis of the disclosure statement when

the genuineness of the said statement is yet to be adjudicated by the

trial Court during the course of the trial. Learned counsel further

contends that in the present case, the investigation is complete in all

respects and no recovery was effected from the present petitioner.

4. On the other hand, learned State counsel has vehemently

opposed the prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner on

the ground that the petitioner is a supplier of the contraband and was

actively involved with co-accused Subhash.

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

the record.

6. It is apparent from the record that the petitioner was not

named in the FIR and is in custody since 21.04.2023. Learned State

counsel has not been able to refer any other evidence against the

present petitioner except the disclosure statement suffered by

Subhash, co-accused. Even otherwise, after the arrest of the petitioner,

no recovery was effected from him and further incarceration of the

petitioner will not be of any useful purpose.

2 of 3

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:142060

7. In view of the above, without commenting any further on

the merits, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered

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

satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate/CJM

concerned.

07.11.2023                                 ( N.S.SHEKHAWAT)
amit rana                                  JUDGE
                   Whether reasoned/speaking  :              Yes/No
                   Whether reportable         :              Yes/No




                                                      Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:142060

                                  3 of 3