Punjab-Haryana High Court
Akintunde vs State Of Punjab on 26 April, 2024
Author: Gurvinder Singh Gill
Bench: Gurvinder Singh Gill
2024:PHHC:057220
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-19484-2024 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 26.04.2024
Akintunde ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab ...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL
Present: Mr. Amritpal Singh Gill, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Vishavjit Singh Virk, DAG, Punjab.
FIR No. Dated Police Station Section/s
131 30.05.2021 Kharar, District 21 of the NDPS Act
SAS Nagar
GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J. (Oral)
1. The petitioner seeks grant of regular bail in respect of aforementioned
FIR.
2. As per the case of the prosecution, the petitioner was apprehended while
in possession of 750 grams of 'heroin'.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely
been implicated in the present case. It has further been submitted that the
petitioner has been behind bars for a substantial period of more than 2
years & 10 months and that since the trial is proceeding at snail's pace,
the petitioner deserves the concession of regular bail.
4. On the other hand, learned State counsel submitted that since the
petitioner was caught red handed at the spot and huge quantity of
CRM-M-19484-2024 (O&M) -2-
contraband was recovered from him, he does not deserve the concession
of bail. Learned State counsel has, however, informed that the petitioner
has been behind bars since the last about 2 years, 10 months & 28 days
and that he is not involved in any other case. It has also been informed
that as on date only 5 PWs out of cited 13 PWs have been examined.
5. This Court has considered rival submissions.
6. Since the petitioner seeks grant of bail mainly on account of long
custody, it is apposite to refer to a few judgments of Hon'ble Supreme
Court in this regard wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court has granted the
concession of bail solely on ground of long custody:
Case No. Date of Title of case Period which the
Decision accused had
undergone when
granted bail by
Hon'ble Supreme
Court
Criminal Appeal 07.02.2020 Chitta Biswas @ Subhas 1 year & 7 months
No.245/2020 Vs. The State of West
Bengal
Criminal Appeal 12.10.2020 Amit Singh Moni Vs. State 2 years & 7 months
No.668/2020 of Himachal Pradesh
Special Leave to 01.08.2022 Nitish Adhikary @ Bapan 1 year & 7 months
Appeal (Criminal) Vs. The State of West
No.5769/2022 Bengal
Special Leave to 04.08.2022 Shariful Islam @ Sarif Vs. 1 year & 6 months
Appeal (Criminal) The State of West Bengal
Criminal Appeal 05.08.2022 Gopal Krishna Patra @ 2 years, 1 month &
No.1169/2022 Gopalrusma Vs. Union of 17 days
India
Special Leave to 22.08.2022 Mohammad Salman Hanif About 2 years
Appeal (Criminal) Shaikh Vs. The State of
No.5530/2022 Gujarat
Criminal Appeal 22.11.2022 Karnail Singh Vs. The 1 year & 8 months
No.2027-2022 State of Odisha
Special Leave to 25.11.2022 Karim Adaldar Vs. The 10 months
Appeal (Criminal) State of West Bengal
No.8653-2022
CRM-M-19484-2024 (O&M) -3-
7. Hon'ble Supreme Court in yet another judgment dated 25.01.2023 arising
out of SLP No.6690-2022 titled Dheeraj Kumar Shukla Vs. State of Uttar
Pradesh has granted bail in a case registered under the NDPS Act where
the accused alongwith co-accused was found in possession of
'commercial' quantity of Ganja and had been behind bars since the last
two and a half years while observing that in the absence of any criminal
antecedents, the conditions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act could be
dispensed with at that stage, particularly when there was delay in
conclusion of trial.
8. Recently, the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 04.05.2023 passed
in SLP (Crl.)No.(s)3221/2023 titled 'Hasanujjaman & othes Vs. The
State of West Bengal' has also granted bail to three accused in a case
registered under the NDPS Act where the accused alongwith co-accused
were found in possession of 115 bottles of phensedyl (100 ml. each) and
had been behind bars since the last 1 year & 4 months while observing
that in the absence of any criminal antecedents, there is substantial
compliance of Section 37 of the NDPS Act.
9. Keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case
particularly the long custody of the petitioner i.e. about 2 years, 10
months & 28 days and the fact that 5 PWs out of cited 13 PWs have been
examined so far, the petition merits acceptance and is hereby accepted.
10. The petition, as such, is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be
released on regular bail on his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the
CRM-M-19484-2024 (O&M) -4-
satisfaction of learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty
Magistrate concerned.
11. It is, however, directed that in case the petitioner is found to be indulging
in similar offence again, the prosecution would be at liberty to move an
application for cancellation of bail before this Court.
26.04.2024 (GURVINDER SINGH GILL)
Vimal JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
