Bittu vs State Of Haryana
2023 Latest Caselaw 20122 P&H

                                                      Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:147136




                                                      2023:PHHC:147136
                                                                                -1-
CRM-M-29105-2023

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                     CHANDIGARH

218                                           CRM-M-29105-2023
                                              Date of decision: 20.11.2023

BITTU                                                                ...Petitioner

                                    Versus

STATE OF HARYANA                                                  ...Respondent

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJBIR SEHRAWAT

Present:-   Mr. Kartar Singh Malik, Advocate,
            for the petitioner.

            Mr. Gagandeep Singh Chhina, AAG, Haryana.

RAJBIR SEHRAWAT, J. (Oral)

1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under

Section 439 Cr.P.C for grant of bail pending trial in case FIR No.22 dated

24.01.2019, registered under Section 20 NDPS Act, 1985, at Police Station

Rohtak Civil Lines, District Rohtak.

2. Reply dated 18.09.2023 by way of affidavit of the Vivek

Kundu, HPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Rohtak, filed in the

Registry, is taken on record.

3. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the case

against the petitioner is totally concocted and fabricated. The petitioner is

not involved in the crime at all. Though the alleged recovery of contraband

effected in the present case, is above the commercial quantity, however, the

petitioner has been in custody since 24.01.2019. The investigation of the

case is already over. The petitioner is not required for any investigation

purposes. The prosecution has examined only 03 witnesses, out of 10

witnesses. Since the prosecution has been totally inefficient and lacks in

1 of 2

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:147136

2023:PHHC:147136

CRM-M-29105-2023

due promptitude in completion of the prosecution evidence, therefore,

liberty of the petitioner cannot be left at the mercy of the prosecution.

Hence, the petitioner deserves to be released on bail pending trial. Learned

counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgments rendered by the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Nitish Adhikary @ Bapan Vs. The

State of West Bengal vide order dated 01.08.2022 passed in SLP

(Criminal) No.5769-2022; Mohd. Muslim @ Hussain Vs. State (NCT of

Delhi), 2023 AIR (Supreme Court) 1648 and another judgment rendered in

Md. Hasanuzzaman Vs. State of West Bengal & Ors, SLP (Crl.) No.3221

of 2023 vide order dated 04.05.2023, to buttress his arguments.

4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel, on instructions from

ASI Rampal, submits that there is a huge recovery of contraband from the

petitioner. There is another case against the petitioner as well, under the

NDPS Act itself. Therefore, the petitioner does not deserve the concession

of bail. However, it is not disputed that the petitioner is in custody since

24.01.2019 and that only 03 witnesses, out of 10 witnesses, have been

examined, so far.

5. In view of the above, but without expressing any further

opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed. The

petitioner is ordered to be released on bail pending trial subject to his

furnishing bail bonds/surety to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty

Magistrate, concerned.

20.11.2023                                             (RAJBIR SEHRAWAT)
parveen kumar                                                JUDGE

                Whether reasoned/speaking?       Yes/No
                Whether reportable?              Yes/No


                                                          Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:147136

                                       2 of 2