Punjab-Haryana High Court
Gurpreet Singh @ Gopi vs State Of Punjab on 15 April, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:050197
Neutral Citation No. 2024:PHHC:050197
221
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M No. 16969 of 2024 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 15.04.2024
Gurpreet Singh @ Gopi
.......... Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
.......... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA
Present: Mr. Ravinder Malik (Ravi), Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Mr. Athar Ahmad, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab
****
HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL)
The petitioner, by way of present (second) petition filed under
Section 439 Cr.P.C., seeks grant of regular bail pending trial in case bearing
FIR No. 109, dated 07.05.2021, under Sections 22 & 29 of NDPS Act;
Section 25 of Arms Act, 1959; and Sections 411 & 483 of IPC, registered at
Police Station City Nawanshahar, District SBS Nagar, Punjab, wherein he
has been implicated against the alleged recovery of 30 injections of
buprenorphine, besides recovery of 2 country-made pistols, 1 pistol, 25 live
cartridges of 7.65, 8 live cartridges of 32 bore and 6 magazines.
[2] Learned State counsel vehemently opposes the prayer made on
behalf of the petitioner, while submitting that the petitioner was involved in
another FIR No. 47 dated 26.04.2021, under Sections 392/34 of IPC,
registered at Police Station Rahon, District Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar,
though in the said FIR, he stands acquitted vide judgment dated 10.11.2022
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:050197
passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, SBS Nagar.
[3] I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through
the paper-book. I find substance in the submissions made by learned counsel
for the petitioner.
[4] In the present case, investigation stands concluded with the
filing of challan on 15.09.2021, followed by framing of charges on
24.03.2022 and the petitioner is behind the bars since 07.05.2021, i.e. for the
past about two years and eleven months by now. The trial is likely to take
some time as out of 26 prosecution witnesses, only 07 have been examined
so far, whereas 05 have been given-up, while 14 remaining witnesses are yet
to be examined.
Considering the custody period of the petitioner and the delay in
trial, which directly hits his fundamental right under Article 21 of the
Constitution of India as regards the speedy trial, this Court does not find
justification to extend the incarceration of the petitioner any further,
especially when in separate trial arising out of FIR No. 47 dated 26.04.2021
(supra), involving the same vehicle wherefrom the recovery in the present
case was alleged, the petitioner stands acquitted vide judgment dated
10.11.2022 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, SBS
Nagar.
[5] In view of the above, but without commenting upon merits of
the present petition, the same is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be
released on bail subject to his furnishing adequate bail bonds / surety bonds
to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate
concerned.
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:050197
[6] It is made clear that this order may not be construed as an
expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
April 15, 2024 ( HARKESH MANUJA )
'dk kamra' JUDGE
Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
3 of 3
