Punjab-Haryana High Court
Baljit Singh vs State Of Punjab on 18 April, 2024
Author: Pankaj Jain
Bench: Pankaj Jain
CRM-M No.52134 of 2023 (O&M) ss: 2024: PHHC:051973
212 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M No.52134 of 2023 (O&M)
Date of decision : 18.04.2024
BaljitSingoh ee Petitioner
versus
StateofPunjab ae Respondent
CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN
REE
Present :- Mr. Rishu Mahajan, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Mohit Kapoor, Sr. DAG, Punjab
REE
PANKAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL)
1 This petition has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant
of regular bail in FIR No.25 dated 03.04.2023 registered under Sections
21/29 of NDPS Act at Police Station Khem Karan, Taran Taran.
2 As per the case of the prosecution a secret information was
received on 03.04.2023 to the effect that Hardiyal Singh @ Sewak son of
Balvir Singh and Baljit Singh, the present petitioner are into business of
selling heroin after procuring the same from across the border. Acting
upon the information road was barricaded. Two persons riding on a
motorcycle were apprehended. The motorcycle was being driven by the
present petitioner while Hardiyal Singh was a pillion rider. Both of them
were searched and 600 grams of heroin was recovered tied to the waist of
the accused Hardiyal Singh concealed underneath his shirt. It has been
authenticity of this
order/judgment.
CRM-M No.52134 of 2023 (O&M) 2: 2024: PHHC:051973
further claimed that on interrogation Hardiyal Singh suffered a disclosure
statement which further led to recovery of 2 kg 472 grams of heroin from a
field in Village Mehandipur owned by one Satnam Singh.
3 Custody certificate has been filed. The same is taken on record.
4 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even if whole of
the case of the prosecution is taken on its face value to be true, it is a case
where no contraband has been recovered from the petitioner. He is behind
bars for more than 1 year and 8 days and had no prior antecedents before
getting arrested in the present matter. Only 2 out of 19 cited witnesses
could be examined till now.
5 Bail plea is opposed by the learned counsel for the State who
submits that the petitioner has proved to be incorrigible and even while in
custody FIR No.144 dated 25.09.2023 registered for offences punishable
under Sections 21/61/85 of NDPS Act, 52 A of Prison Act was registered.
6 Faced with the situation learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that so far as FIR No.144 is concerned, the same is classic case of
false implication and the same has been noticed by the Addl. Sessions
Judge, Tarn Taran in his order dated 27.02.2024 while admitting the
petitioner to bail in the following terms :-
"As per FIR the allegations are that on the ruqa sent by SI Rajwant Kaur
and the FIR in question was registered to the effect that on dated
30.06.2023, when the police party raided the Jail with the help of Jail
Authorities and the applicant was found in conscious possession of 7
grams of Opium like substance, which was recovered from him but the
FIR was registered on 25.09.2023, after gap of about 3 months. Now, the
accused is in custody. To verify the fact that the FIR was not promptly
registered and till date challan is not presented, there are sufficient
grounds to release the applicant on bail. As such, applicant is ordered to
be released regular bail on furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000/-
with one surety in the like amount."
CRM-M No.52134 of 2023 (O&M) 333: 2024: PHHC:051973
7 I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone
through the records of the case.
8 Without commenting on the merits of the case, keeping in view
the fact that it is a case where there is no recovery effected from the
petitioner and the mode and manner in which co-accused had concealed the
contraband while on motorcycle with the petitioner, it cannot be said with
certainty that the petitioner was in knowledge thereof, the present petition
is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing
bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Ld. Trial Court/Duty Magistrate,
concemed. However, in addition to conditions that may be imposed by the
Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned, the petitioner shall remain bound by
the following conditions :-
(i) The petitioner shall not mis-use the liberty granted.
(ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with any evidence oral or
documentary during the trial.
(iii) The petitioner shall not absent himself on any date before the trial.
(iv) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail.
(Vv) The petitioner shall deposit his passport, if any with the trial Court.
(vi) The petitioner shall give his cellphone number to the police
authorities and shall not change his cell-phone number without
permission of the trial Court.
(vii) The petitioner shall not in any manner try to delay the trial.
9 Needless to say that anything observed herein shall not be
construed to be an opinion on the merits of the case.
(PANKAJ JAIN )
JUDGE
18.04.2024
Pooja sharma-I
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes
Whether Reportable : No
