Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sarwan Singh @ Dhanna @ Swaran Singh vs State Of Punjab on 12 March, 2024
Author: Jasjit Singh Bedi
Bench: Jasjit Singh Bedi
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:035255
2024:PHHC:035255
CRM-M-59518-2023 #1#
213
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.
CRM-M-59518-2023
Date of Decision:-12.03.2024
SARWAN SINGH @ DHANNA @ SWARAN SINGH
......Petitioner.
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB
......Respondent.
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI
Present:- Mr. Lovepreet Handa, Advocate
for the Petitioner.
Mr. Deepinder Singh Brar, Addl. DAG, 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.171 dated 07.08.2022 registered under
Section 21 of the NDPS Act, 1985, (Sections 29, 30 of the NDPS Act added
later on) at Police Station Special Task Force Phase-4, Mohali, District STF
Wing.
2. The brief facts of the case are that Sarwan Singh @ Dhanna @
Swaran Singh (petitioner) son of Kashmir Singh and Jasvir Singh @ Jass
son of Lal Singh were apprehended with 600 grams of heroin.
3. Jasvir Singh @ Jass disclosed that the heroin which had been
recovered from them had been obtained from Gursewak Singh @ Sucha @
Babbu son of Gurdeep Singh, Gurdeep Singh @ Nagar Singh and Mohan
Singh @ Mohna. Jasvir Singh further disclosed that 4 days prior to his
arrest, he had delivered 100 grams of heroin to Binny Tak, Assistant
Superintendent Central Jail, Faridkot. On the basis of the disclosure
1 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:035255
2024:PHHC:035255
CRM-M-59518-2023 #2#
statement, Gursewak Singh @ Sucha @ Babbu Gurdeep Singh @ Nagar
Singh, Mohan Singh @ Mohna and Binny Tak were nominated as accused
vide DDR No.13 dated 13.08.2022.
Binny Tak was arrested and suffered his disclosure statement
that out of the heroin which had been received by him from Jasvir Singh, he
had given 50 grams to one Buta Khan @ Bagga Khan who was confined in
Central Jail, Faridkot at that time. On the basis of the said statement, Buta
Khan @ Bagga Khan was nominated as an accused vide DDR No.24 dated
02.09.2022.
Binny Tak and Buta Khan @ Bagga Khan were declared
innocent. After the completion of the investigation, the report under Section
173(2) Cr.P.C. was submitted against petitioner-Sarwan Singh @ Dhanna @
Swaran Singh, Jasvir Singh @ Jass and Gurdeep Singh.
A supplementary challan was submitted against Gursewak
Singh @ Sucha @ Babbu and thereafter on the arrest of the petitioner, yet
another supplementary challan was submitted against him on 27.02.2024.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. The mandatory
provisions of Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act have not been complied
with in their proper perspective. No independent witness was joined at the
time of search and seizure. As he was a first-time offender, in custody since
07.08.2022 and none of the 13 prosecution witnesses had been examined so
far, the Trial of the present case was not likely to be concluded anytime soon
and therefore, he was entitled to the concession of bail 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
2 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:035255
2024:PHHC:035255
CRM-M-59518-2023 #3#
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.
5. On the other hand, the learned State counsel contends that
commercial quantity of contraband has been recovered from the petitioner.
Therefore, in view of the bar contained under Section 37 of the NDPS Act,
the petitioner was not entitled to the grant of bail. He, however, concedes
that the petitioner is a first time offender, in custody since 07.08.2022 and
none of the 13 prosecution witnesses had been examined so far.
6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
7. 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
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.
3 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:035255
2024:PHHC:035255
CRM-M-59518-2023 #4#
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."
8. 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
(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
4 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:035255
2024:PHHC:035255
CRM-M-59518-2023 #5#
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)
9. In the instant case, the petitioner is stated to be in custody since
07.08.2022 and none of the 13 prosecution witnesses have been examined so
far. He is also a first-time offender with no other case registered against him.
In this situation, 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-Sarwan Singh @ Dhanna @ Swaran
Singh is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds
5 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:035255
2024:PHHC:035255
CRM-M-59518-2023 #6#
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
12.03.2024
JITESH
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:035255
6 of 6
