Sandeep Kumar Alias Allu vs State Of Punjab
2024 Latest Caselaw 16353 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Sandeep Kumar Alias Allu vs State Of Punjab on 5 September, 2024

                                      Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:116489




CRM M-42614 of 2024                                  -1-




      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                   AT CHANDIGARH

227                         CRM M-42614 of 2024
                            Date of Decision: 05.09.2024

Sandeep Kumar @ Allu                                            ...Petitioner
                                   Versus
State of Punjab                                            ... Respondent


CORAM :       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.S.SHEKHAWAT

Present :    Mr. Parminder Singh Sekhon, Advocate
             for the petitioner.

             Mr. M.S. Bajwa, DAG, Punjab.

N.S.SHEKHAWAT, J. (Oral)

1. The petitioner has filed the instant petition under Section

439 of the Cr.P.C. with a prayer to grant a regular bail in case FIR

No.30 dated 01.03.2021 registered under Sections 21-C of the NDPS

Act at Police Station Tarn Taran, District Tarn Taran.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner

has been falsely implicated in this case and that he is innocent and has

not committed any offence as alleged in FIR. Learned counsel for the

petitioner further submits that the petitioner was not arrested at the

spot and has been nominated in this case after obtaining production

warrants from court. No recovery was effected from the petitioner and

265 grams of heroin has been planted upon the him. Learned counsel

for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner is in custody since

1 of 3

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:116489

date of arrest on 01.03.2021 and conclusion of trial may take quite a

long time.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contends that

the quantity of the contraband recovered from the petitioner is

marginally above the 'commercial quantity'. Even no independent

witness was joined by the police party and the police has not followed

the procedure, relating to the search and seizure of the contraband.

Learned counsel has also placed reliance on these judgments in (i)

CRM-M-37684-2021, Balwinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab, decided

on 14.02.2022; (ii) CRM-M-8212-2022, Tajinder Singh Vs. State of

Punjab, decided on 03.03.2022 and (iii) CRM-M35186-2016, Manjit

Kaur @ Jeeto vs. State of Punjab, decided on 01.12.2016, whereby

the petitioners in the said cases were granted the concession of bail,

wherein the accused were arrested with the quantity of contraband,

which was marginally above the 'commercial quantity

4. On the other hand, learned State counsel has vehemently

opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner on the

ground that the quantity of contraband recovered from the present

petitioner falls within the definition of 'commercial quantity' and the

stringent provisions of Section 37 of NDPS Act would be applicable

in the present case.

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

perused the record.

2 of 3

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:116489

6. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is incarcerated for

the last three years and six months. Apart from that, the alleged

recovery of the contraband is just marginally above the 'commercial

quantity' and in similar circumstances, the prayer for regular bail has

been allowed by co-ordinate Benches of this Court. Without

commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed

and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his

furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial

Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate, concerned.

05.09.2024                            (N.S.SHEKHAWAT)
amit rana                                   JUDGE
             Whether reasoned/speaking :      Yes/No
             Whether reportable          :    Yes/No




                                  3 of 3