Gurwinder Singh vs State Of Punjab
2024 Latest Caselaw 13427 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Gurwinder Singh vs State Of Punjab on 2 August, 2024

                                 Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:099001



CRM-M No.25920 of 2023 (O&M)                                              1




     IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                    CHANDIGARH

257-2
                                         CRM-M No.25920 of 2023 (O&M)
                                             Date of decision: 02.08.2024

Gurwinder Singh
                                                              ....Petitioner
                                  Versus
State of Punjab
                                                            ....Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR

Present:    Mr. Satnam Singh Gill, Advocate
            for the petitioner.

            Mr. Surya Kumar, AAG, Punjab.

NAMIT KUMAR J. (Oral)

1. Prayer in this 1st petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C., is

for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No.49 dated

14.06.2022, registered under Sections 22 and 29 of the NDPS Act, at

Police Station Cheema, District Sangrur.

2. As per prosecution case, the allegations levelled in the FIR

are that on 14.06.2022, ASI Jasvir Singh alongwith his police party was

on patrolling duty with regard to checking of suspected persons and

was going from Village Tolawal towards Dharmgarh. At about 06.15

P.M. when the police party reached at drain bridge village Tolawal, they

saw a car bearing registration No. UP 17-T-8125 on the left side of the

drain and near the said car, two persons were seen standing with a

polybag. On the basis of suspicion, ASI Jasvir Singh stopped his

vehicle and alighted from the same alongwith the other police officials.

1 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:099001

In the meanwhile, the said persons threw their polybag which they were

holding. Both the said persons were nabbed by the police team. On

inquiry, they disclosed their name as Gurwinder Singh @ Happy

(petitioner herein) and Simranjit Singh @ Jiya. On checking the said

polybag, 900 intoxicant tablets (90 strips having 10/10 tablets each)

were recovered. On these allegations, the present FIR was registered.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that

the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present

case. He further submits that the petitioner is in custody for the last 02

years 01 month and 16 days.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the

investigation in the present case is complete as challan stands

presented; charges have been framed and out of total 14 prosecution

witnesses, only 05 PWs have been examined so far and the trial is likely

to take considerable time to conclude and, therefore, no fruitful purpose

would be served by detaining the petitioner behind the bars.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to a

judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court passed in "Satender Kumar

Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another", 2022(10)

SCC 51, to contend that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has discussed the

serious issue with regard to repeated adjournments and its effect upon

the Right to Life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

6. Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the prayer

for grant of regular bail to the petitioner on the ground that the

2 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:099001

petitioner is a habitual offender and apart from the present FIR, he is

involved in two more cases i.e. FIR No.101 dated 01.01.2020 registered

under Section 22 of the NDPS Act at Police Station Bhawanigarh,

District Sangrur and FIR No.237 dated 02.12.2019 registered under

Sections 22, 29 of the NDPS Act, at Police Station Bhikhi, District

Mansa and therefore, he does not deserve the concession of regular bail.

However, he could not refute that out of total 14 prosecution witnesses,

only 05 PWs have been examined till date; petitioner is in custody for

the last 02 years 01 months and 16 days and the trial may take a

considerable time to conclude.

7. Refuting the above contention of the learned State counsel,

learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in FIR No.101 dated

01.01.2020, the petitioner has already undergone the sentence and in

FIR No.237 dated 02.12.2019, he is on bail. He further relies upon the

judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Maulana Mohd. Amir

Rashadi Vs. State of U.P. and another", 2012 (2) SCC 382, to contend

that the facts and circumstances of the present case are to be seen while

deciding a bail application and the bail application of the petitioner

cannot be rejected solely on the ground that the petitioner is involved in

other cases. The relevant portion of the said judgment is reproduced

hereinbelow:-

"As observed by the High Court, merely on the basis of criminal antecedents, the claim of the second respondent cannot be rejected. In other words, it is the duty of the Court to find out the role of the accused in the

3 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:099001

case in which he has been charged and other circumstances such as possibility of fleeing away from the jurisdiction of the Court etc."

8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

record.

9. In view of the custody period undergone by the petitioner,

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 Number Date of Title of case Period which Decision the accused had undergone when granted bail by Hon'ble Supreme Court Criminal Appeal 07.02.2020 Chitta Biswas @ 1 year and 7 No.245/2020 Subhas Vs. the months State of West Bengal Criminal Appeal 12.10.2020 Amit Singh 2 years and 7 No.668/2020 Moni Vs. State months of Himachal Pradesh Special Leave to 10.11.2021 Kulwant Singh More than 2 Appeal (Crl.) Vs. The State of years No.5187 of 2021 Punjab Special Leave to 01.08.2022 Nitish Adhikary 1 year and 7 Appeal (Crl.) @ Bapan Vs. the months No.5769/2022 State of West Bengal Special Leave to 04.08.2022 Shariful Islam 1 year and 6 Appeal (Crl.) @ Sarif Vs. the months No.4173 of 2022 State of West Bengal Criminal Appeal 05.08.2022 Gopal Krishna 2 years 1 month No.1169 of 2022 Patra @ and 17 days Gopalrusma Vs. Union of India

4 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:099001

Special Leave to 22.08.2022 Mohammad About 2 years Appeal (Crl.) Salman Hanif No.5530-2022 Shaikh Vs. the State of Gurjarat Special Leave to 31.10.2022 Shahjad Vs. The About 2 years Appeal (Crl.) State of Uttar No.7840 of 2022 Pradesh

10. Without commenting anything on merits of the case and

considering the fact that the petitioner is in custody for the last about 02

years 01 month and 16 days; investigation is complete; challan stands

presented; charges have been framed and out of 14 PWs, only 05 PWs

have been examined so far and the trial is likely to take considerable

time to conclude, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is directed

to be released on regular bail subject to his furnishing bail/surety bonds

to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate

concerned. 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 directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case, so as to dissuade him to disclose such facts to the Court or to any other authority.

(ii) The petitioner shall remain present before the Court on the dates fixed for hearing of the case.

(iii) The petitioner shall not absent himself from the Court proceedings except on the prior permission of the Court concerned.

(iv) The petitioner shall surrender his passport, if any, (if already not surrendered), and in case he is not

5 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:099001

holder of the same, he shall swear an affidavit to that effect.

(v) The petitioner shall also file his affidavit before the concerned Court, mentioning his ordinary place of residence and number of mobile phone, which shall be used by him during the pendency of the trial. In case of change of place of residence/mobile number, he shall share the details with the concerned Court/learned trial Court.

(vi) The concerned Court may insist on two heavy local sureties and may also impose any other condition, in accordance with law, while accepting the bail bonds and surety bonds of the petitioner.

11. In case of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions and

those which may be imposed by the trial Court, the prosecution shall be

at liberty to move an application for cancellation of bail of the

petitioner.

                                             (NAMIT KUMAR)
                                                 JUDGE
02.08.2024
yakub         Whether speaking/reasoned:              Yes/No

              Whether reportable:                     Yes/No




                                  6 of 6