Punjab-Haryana High Court
Arun Kumar vs State Of Punjab on 20 November, 2024
Author: Jasjit Singh Bedi
Bench: Jasjit Singh Bedi
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:151583
CRM-M-46643-2024 #1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.
Date of Decision:-20.11.2024
CRM-M-46643-2024
Arun Kumar.
......Petitioner.
Versus
State of Punjab.
......Respondent.
AND
CRM-M-47560-2024
Dalak Muni @ Nanki.
......Petitioner.
Versus
State of Punjab.
......Respondent.
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI
Present:- Mr. Anureet S. Sidhu, Advocate for the Petitioner
(in CRM-M-46643-2024).
Mr. S.S. Gill, Advocate for the Petitioner
(in CRM-M-47560-2024).
Mr. Harkanwar Jeet Singh, AAG Punjab.
***
JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J.(ORAL)
By this common order I shall dispose of both the
aforementioned petitions as the same have arisen out of one and the same
FIR.
2. The Prayers in these petitions under section 483 BNSS 2023 is
for the grant of regular bail in case FIR No.0088 dated 15.04.2023 under
Sections 15 of NDPS Act, 1985 (Section 29 of the NDPS Act added later on)
1 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:151583
CRM-M-46643-2024 #2
registered at Police Station Patran, District Patiala.
3. The brief facts of the case are that one Dalak Muni @ Nanki
(petitioner in CRM-M-47560-2024) son of Sh. Gurbax Singh and Arun
Kumar (petitioner in CRM-M-46643-2024) son of Sh. Kanhaiya Lal came to
be apprehended with 180 Kg of Poppy Husk.
During the course of interrogation Dalak Muni @ Nanki
disclosed that he used to sell the same to Bhinda Virk of Bahadurgarh. Upon
this accused Bhupinder Singh @ Binda was nominated as an accused.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the
petitioners have 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 they were first-time offenders, in custody
since 15.04.2023 respectively and only 03 of the 23 prosecution witnesses
had been examined so far, the trial of the present case was not likely to be
concluded anytime soon and therefore, they were 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 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 has filed Status
reports by way of affidavits dated 19.11.2024 of Mr. Inderpal Chohan, PPS,
Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub Division Patran, District Patiala in the
court today in both the cases, which are taken on record. While referring to
2 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:151583
CRM-M-46643-2024 #3
the same he contends that commercial quantity of contraband has been
recovered from the petitioners. Therefore, in view of the bar contained
under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, the petitioners were not entitled to the
grant of bail. He, however, concedes that the petitioners are first time
offenders, in custody since 15.04.2023 and only 03 of the 23 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.
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.
3 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:151583
CRM-M-46643-2024 #4
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
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
4 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:151583
CRM-M-46643-2024 #5
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. 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
offenders as is borne out from the orders.
10. In the instant case, the petitioners are stated to be in custody
since 15.04.2023 and only 03 of the 23 prosecution witnesses have been
examined so far. They are also first-time offenders with no other case
registered against them. 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 petitioners can be considered for the grant of
bail.
11. Thus without commenting on the merits of the case, the present
petitions are allowed and the petitioners-Arun Kumar son of Sh. Kanhaiya
Lal and Dalak Muni @ Nanki son of Sh. Gurbax Singh is ordered to be
released on bail subject to their furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the
satisfaction of learned CJM/Duty Magistrate, concerned.
5 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:151583
CRM-M-46643-2024 #6
12. The petitioners 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 they are not involved in any other crime other than
the present case.
13. In addition, the petitioners (or anyone on their behalf) shall
prepare an FDR in the sum of Rs.50,000/- each 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 petitioners from trial without sufficient cause.
14. The petitions stand disposed of.
( JASJIT SINGH BEDI )
JUDGE
November 20, 2024
Vinay
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
6 of 6
