Punjab-Haryana High Court
Gurbachan Singh @ Gagan vs State Of Punjab on 28 October, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:141109
CRM-M-27513-2024 (O&M) 1
213 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-27513-2024 (O&M)
Date of decision: 28.10.2024
GURBACHAN SINGH @ GAGAN
...PETITIONER
V/S
STATE OF PUNJAB
...RESPONDENT
S
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR
Present: Mr. Jashandeep Singh Sandhu, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Sandeep Kumar, DAG Punjab.
****
HARPREET SINGH BRAR J. (ORAL)
1. This is the second petition under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant
of regular bail in case bearing FIR No. 37 dated 24.04.2023 registered under
Section 22 of NDPS Act at Police Station Ghall Khurd District Ferozepur
Punjab.
2. The FIR(supra) was lodged against the petitioner on the basis of
secret information that when police party was patrolling and checking
suspicious persons going from CIA staff Zira to Talwandi Bhai via Mudki etc.
and reached underneath the bridge made on Baghapurana road on National
Highway, then informer signaled a vehicle to stop, and thereafter he came to
ASI Sahab Singh in private and gave information that Gurbachan Singh @
Gagan (petitioner herein) is habitual of selling intoxicant tablets and today also
he on his motorcycle No. PB69C 4930 CD DLX colour black is coming from
his village Langeana Khurd for selling intoxicant tablets at Mudki and if naka
bandi is laid on gate of village Fidaturn on link road, then Gurbachan Singh
can be apprehended alongwith intoxicant tablets. Information was found to be
credible and trustworthy and the petitioner was apprehended with contraband
1 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:141109
and FIR(supra) under Sections 22/61/85 of NDPS Act was got registered on the
basis of aforesaid allegations.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends this is the
second petition seeking grant of regular bail to the petitioner and the first
petition was dismissed as withdrawn on 08.12.2023 and the present petition has
been filed as more than 01 year and 06 months have passed and learned trial
Court has failed to conclude its evidence and petitioner is not involved in any
other case and case of the petitioner is covered by the ratio of laid down by
Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP 12788-2023 titled as Nandalal Mondal @
Abhay Mondal Vs. The State of West Bangal. Learned counsel further
contends that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and drill
of mandatory safeguards provided under the NDPS Act have not been followed
and no independent witness was joined and the sample was dispatched to the
Forensic Science Laboratory after a substantial delay and there is total non-
compliance of Sections 42, 50 and 52 of NDPS Act and petitioner is behind the
bars since 24.04.2023 and delay in conclusion of trial cannot be attributable to
the petitioner as he is in judicial custody and reliance in this regard has been
placed upon the judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court passed in Criminal
Appeal No. 1202 of 2024 titled as Md. Aliul Islam @ Aliul Islam @ Alius Vs.
The State of West Bengal, SLP(Crl.) No. 14970-2023 titled as Debrata
Mondal Vs. State of West Bengal, SLP(Crl.) No. 13169/2023 titled as
Santarul Islam @ Santa Vs. The State of West Bengal, SLP(Crl.) No.
8512/2023 titled as Indrajit Mondal @ Piglu Vs. The State of West Bengal,
SLP(Crl.) No. 14172/2023 titled as Narjul Islam @ Najbul Hoque Vs. The
State of West Bengal, Nandlal Mondal @ Abhay Mondal Vs. The State of
West Bengal, SLP(Crl.) No. 15284/2023 titled as Subhashri Das @ Rana @
2 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:141109
Subhoshree Vs. The State of West Bengal, Criminal Appeal No. 1200/2024
titled as Mithun Sk. & Anr. Vs. The State of West Bengal, Criminal Appeal
No. 1415/2024 titled as SK. Nasiruddin @ Nasirddin SK. Vs. State of West
Bengal, SLP(Crl.) No. 12670/2023 titled as Indadul Shah Vs. The State of
West Bengal, Hanef Kharsani @ Hanef Sheikh Vs. Union of India,
SLP(Crl.) No. 16663/2023 titled as Ripon Seikh & Ors. Vs. State of West
Bengal, Nijam Sheikh @ Md. Nijam SK @ MD Nizam SK Vs. The State of
West Bengal, SLP(Crl.) No. 15668/2023 titled as Moidul Sarkar Vs. The
State of West Bengal, SLP(Crl.) No. 2354/2024 titled as Saniya Bibi @
Soniya Bibi Vs. The State of West Bengal, SLP(Crl.) No. 15496/2023 titles as
Saddam Hossain Vs. State of West Bengal, SLP(Crl.) No. 6046/2024 titled as
Bijon SK @ Golam Murselim Vs. The State of West Bengal and Criminal
Appeal No(s) 245/2020 @ SLP(Crl.) No. 8823/2019 titled as Chitta Biswas @
Subhas Vs. The State of West Bengal.
4. Per contra, learned State counsel filed the custody certificate,
which is taken on record and opposes the prayer made by learned counsel for
the petitioner on the ground that there are serious and specific allegations
against the petitioner. However, he could not controvert the fact that petitioner
is not involved in any other case.
5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after perusing
the record, it transpires that petitioner is behind the bars since 26.04.2023 i.e.
for 01 year and 06 months as on 26.10.2024. Out of total 15 prosecution
witnesses, only 11 have been examined so far. Culpability, if any, would be
determined at the time of the trial.
6. The foundational concept of the criminal jurisprudence is to ensure
speedy trial. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has repeatedly reiterated that right to
3 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:141109
speedy trial is enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Speedy trial
would cover investigation, enquiry, trial, appeal, revision and retrial etc. i.e.
everything starting with the accusation against the accused and expiring with
the final verdict of the last Court.
7. It has further been held in law that if a person is deprived of his
liberty under a procedure which is not reasonable, fair, or just, such deprivation
would be violative of his fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution
of India. The procedure so prescribed must ensure speedy trial for
determination of the guilt of such person. Some amount of denial of personal
liberty cannot be avoided, but if the period of deprivation pending trial
becomes excessively long, the fairness guaranteed by Article 21 of the
Constitution of India would come into play.
8. In this regard, reference is being made to the law laid down by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the context of right to speedy trial under Article 21
of the Constitution of India on the following decision:- Akhtari Bi Vs. State of
M.P., (2001) 4 SCC 355, Surinder Singh Alias Shingara Singh Vs. State of
Punjab, (2005) SCC (Crl) 1674, P. Ramachandra Rao Vs. State of
Karnataka, (2002) 4 SCC 578, Babu Singh and others Vs. State of U.P.,
(1978) 1 SCC 579, Takht Singh and others Vs. State of M.P., (2001) 10 SCC
463; Special Leave to Appeal (Crl) No.2356 of 2010, Kushal Singh Vs. State
of U.P. (2JJ.) and Fazal Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2012) 5 SCC 752.
9. In view of the above, the present petition is allowed and the
petitioner-Gurbachan Singh @ Gagan is ordered to be released on regular bail,
subject to his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of
CJM/Duty Magistrate concerned.
4 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:141109
10. Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed as expression of
opinion of this Court on merits of the case and the trial Court shall proceed
without being prejudiced by observations of this Court.
(HARPREET SINGH BRAR)
October 28, 2024 JUDGE
Ajay Goswami
(i) Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
(ii) Whether reportable Yes/No
5 of 5
