Harpreet Singh Alias Billa vs State Of Punjab
2024 Latest Caselaw 737 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Harpreet Singh Alias Billa vs State Of Punjab on 15 January, 2024

Author: Jasjit Singh Bedi

Bench: Jasjit Singh Bedi

                                                            Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:004746




 CRM-M-4778-2023                #1#                    2024:PHHC:004746

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
                      CHANDIGARH.


                                                             CRM-M-4778-2023

                                                   Date of Decision:-15.01.2024

Harpreet Singh @ Billa.

                                                                     ......Petitioner.
                                         Vs.

State of Punjab.

                                                                   ......Respondent.

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI

Present:-   Mr. Manvinder Singh Sidhu, Advocate for the Petitioner.

            Mr. Kirat Singh Sidhu, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.

                                   ***

JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J.(ORAL)

The Prayer in this petition under Section 439 Cr.PC is for the

grant of regular bail in case FIR No.100 dated 07.06.2021 under Sections

22(c)/61/85 of NDPS Act, 1985 registered at Police Station Talwandi Sabo,

District Bathinda.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner came to be

apprehended with 5600 tablets of TRAMA-100 containing the salt Tramadol

Hydrochloride.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the

petitioner had been falsely implicated in the present case. There was

violation of mandatory provisions of the Act regarding search and seizure

including Sections 42 and 50. The petitioner was in custody since

07.06.2021 and only 02 out of the 11 prosecution witnesses had been

examined so far. Therefore, the trial of the present case is not likely to be

1 of 5

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:004746

CRM-M-4778-2023 #2# 2024:PHHC:004746

concluded anytime soon. In the one other case registered against the

petitioner, bearing FIR No.66 dated 12.06.2021 under Sections 22, 25

(Section 29 added later on ) NDPS Act P.S. Nahianwala, Bathinda he had

been granted the concession of bail by this Court. He, therefore, prays that

in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Nitish

Adhikary @ Bapan Versus The State of West Bengal, SLP (Crl.)

Nos.5769/2022 arising out of judgment and order dated 04.05.2022 in

CRM(NDPS) No.442/2022, decided on 01.08.2022 and Hasanujjaman &

others Versus The State of West Bengal, SLP (Crl.) No.(s).3221/2023

arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 29.11.2022 in

CRM(NDPS) No.1323/2022, decided on 04.05.2023, the petitioner was

entitled to the concession of bail.

4. The learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, contends

that the petitioner is a convict in one other case under the NDPS Act.

Therefore, he was not entitled to the concession of bail. He, however,

concedes that the petitioner was in custody since 07.06.2021, only 02 out of

the 11 prosecution witnesses had been examined so far and in the one other

case registered against him, the petitioner had been granted the concession

of regular bail.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Nitish Adhikary @

Bapan Vs. The State of West Bengal SLP (Crl.) Nos.5769/2022 Decided on

01.08.2022 held as under:-

"As per the office report dated 29.07.2022, copy of the show cause notice along with Special Leave Petition was supplied to the Standing Counsel for the State of West Bengal and separate notice has been served on the State also. However, no one has entered appearance on their

2 of 5

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:004746

CRM-M-4778-2023 #3# 2024:PHHC:004746

behalf.

The petitioner seeks enlargement on bail in F.I.R. No. 612 of 2020 dated 17.10.2020 filed under Section 21(c) and 37 of the NDPS 2 Act, registered at Police Station Bongaon, West Bengal.

During the course of the hearing, we are informed that the petitioner has undergone custody for a period of 01 year and 07 months as on 09.06.2022. The trial is at a preliminary stage, as only one witness has been examined. The petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents.

Taking into consideration the period of sentence undergone by the petitioner and all the attending circumstances but without expressing any views in the merits of the case, we are inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

The petitioner is accordingly, directed to be released on bail subject to him furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

The Special Leave Petition is disposed of on the aforestated terms.

Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of."

7. In Hasanujjaman & others Versus The State of West Bengal,

SLP (Crl.) No.(s).3221/2023, decided on 04.05.2023, held as under:-

"1. There are three petitioners in this Special Leave Petition, who were accused of committing an offence under Sections 21(c)/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, `NDPS Act') in FIR No.18/2022, dated 09.01.2022, registered at Police Station Islampur, District Murshidabad, West Bengal.

2. The allegations are that when the police party intercepted the petitioners along with another person riding on two motorcycles, they were found in possession of codeine phosphate in a consignment of phensedyl bottles loaded in two nylon bags. During the search, 115 bottles

3 of 5

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:004746

CRM-M-4778-2023 #4# 2024:PHHC:004746

(100 ml. each) of phensedyl were recovered from the joint possession of the petitioners. They were arrested on the spot and have been in custody for more than one year and four months.

3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the record.

4. The investigation is complete; chargesheet has been filed, though the charges are yet to be framed. The conclusion of trial will, thus, take some reasonable time, regardless of the direction issued by the High Court to conclude the same within one year from the date of framing of charges. The petitioners do not have any criminal antecedents. There is, thus, substantial compliance of Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

5. In such circumstances, but without expressing any views on the merits of the case, we deem it appropriate to release the petitioners on bail subject to the terms and conditions as may be imposed by the Trial Court.

6. Additionally, it is clarified that in case the petitioners are found involved in any other case under the NDPS Act or other penal law, it shall amount to misuse of the concession of bail granted to them today, and in such a case, necessary consequences shall follow.

7. The petitioners are further directed to appear before the Trial Court regularly. In the event of they being absent, it shall again be taken as a misuse of concession of bail.

8. The Special Leave Petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

9. As a result, pending interlocutory application also stands disposed of.

(emphasis supplied)

8. Admittedly, in 'Nitish Adhikary @ Bapan' (supra) and

'Hasanujjaman & others' (supra), the accused therein had been granted the

concession of bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court after they had undergone

approximately one and a half years of custody. They were also first-time

4 of 5

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:004746

CRM-M-4778-2023 #5# 2024:PHHC:004746

offenders as is borne out from the orders.

9. In the present case, the petitioner has undergone more than two

and a half years of custody. In the one other case registered against him he

had been granted the concession of bail. In view of the fact that the

petitioner has undergone a substantial period of custody, the rigors of

Section 37 of the NDPS Act can be diluted to an extent in view of the

salutary provisions of Article 21 of the Constitution of India which provides

for the right to a speedy trial and the case of the petitioner can be considered

for the grant of bail.

10. Thus without commenting on the merits of the case, the present

petition is allowed and the petitioner-Harpreet Singh @ Billa is ordered to

be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to

the satisfaction of learned CJM/Duty Magistrate, concerned.

11. The petitioner shall appear before the police station concerned

on the first Monday of every month till the conclusion of the trial and inform

in writing each time that he is not involved in any other crime other than the

present case.

12. In addition, the petitioner (or anyone on his behalf) shall

prepare an FDR in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- and deposit the same with the

Trial Court. The same would be liable to be forfeited as per law in case of

the absence of the petitioner from trial without sufficient cause.

13. The petition stands disposed of.

                                                ( JASJIT SINGH BEDI )
                                                     JUDGE
January 15, 2024
Vinay
         Whether speaking/reasoned                    Yes/No
         Whether reportable                           Yes/No

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:004746

5 of 5