Punjab-Haryana High Court

Vinod Kumar vs State Of Haryana on 20 November, 2023

                                                          Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:147510




                                                                      2023:PHHC:147510

CRM-M-57296-2023                                                               -1-


            IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
                        AT CHANDIGARH.


                                                              CRM-M-57296-2023
                                             Date of Decision:- November 20, 2023


Vinod Kumar
                                                                        ......Petitioner
                                             Vs.

State of Haryana

                                                                      ......Respondent

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI

Present:-      Mr. Lakshit Muthreja, Advocate for the Petitioner.

               Ms. Ankita Ahuja, AAG, Haryana.

                                   ***

JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J.(ORAL)

The Prayer in this petition under Section 439 Cr.PC is for the

grant of regular bail in case FIR No. 296 dated 5.5.2022 under Sections 22-C

and 61 of NDPS Act registered at Police Station Sector 8, Faridabad.

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

patrolling duty, secret information was received that Vinod Kumar

(petitioner) r/o E-227, Block-E, JJ Colony, Camp No.2, Nangloi, New

Delhi-41 was doing the business of selling of narcotic injections and was

standing below the YMCA Flyover in search of customer for selling the

same. If a raid was conducted, he could be apprehended with the injections.

1 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:147510

2023:PHHC:147510

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the

petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. The mandatory

provisions of Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act have not been complied

with in their proper perspective. No independent witness was joined at the

time of search and seizure. As he was a first-time offender, in custody since

5.5.2022 and none of the 14 prosecution witnesseses had been examined so

far, the trial of the present case was not likely to be concluded anytime soon

and therefore, he was entitled to the concession of bail in view of the

judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of 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 Hasanujjaman & others Versus The State of

West Bengal, SLP (Crl.) No.(s).3221/2023 arising out of impugned final

judgment and order dated 29.11.2022 in CRM(NDPS) No.1323/2022,

decided on 04.05.2023.

4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel contends that

commercial quantity of contraband has been recovered from the petitioner.

Therefore, in view of the bar contained under Section 37 of the NDPS Act,

the petitioner was not entitled to the grant of bail. She, however, concedes

that the petitioner was a first time offender, in custody since 5.05.2022 and

none of the 14 prosecution witnesses had been examined so far.

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

2 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:147510

2023:PHHC:147510

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:-

"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."

3 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:147510

2023:PHHC:147510

7. In Hasanujjaman & others Versus The State of West Bengal,

SLP (Crl.) No.(s).3221/2023, decided on 04.05.2023, held as under:-

"1. There are three petitioners in this Special Leave Petition, who were accused of committing an offence under Sections 21(c)/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, `NDPS Act') in FIR No.18/2022, dated 09.01.2022, registered at Police Station Islampur, District Murshidabad, West Bengal.

2. The allegations are that when the police party intercepted the petitioners along with another person riding on two motorcycles, they were found in possession of codeine phosphate in a consignment of phensedyl bottles loaded in two nylon bags. During the search, 115 bottles (100 ml. each) of phensedyl were recovered from the joint possession of the petitioners. They were arrested on the spot and have been in custody for more than one year and four months.

3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the record.

4. The investigation is complete; chargesheet has been filed, though the charges are yet to be framed. The conclusion of trial will, thus, take some reasonable time, regardless of the direction issued by the High Court to conclude the same within one year from the date of framing of charges. The petitioners do not have any criminal antecedents. There is, thus, substantial compliance of Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

5. In such circumstances, but without expressing any views on the merits of the case, we deem it appropriate to release

4 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:147510

2023:PHHC:147510

the petitioners on bail subject to the terms and conditions as may be imposed by the Trial Court.

6. Additionally, it is clarified that in case the petitioners are found involved in any other case under the NDPS Act or other penal law, it shall amount to misuse of the concession of bail granted to them today, and in such a case, necessary consequences shall follow.

7. The petitioners are further directed to appear before the Trial Court regularly. In the event of they being absent, it shall again be taken as a misuse of concession of bail.