Ramu Yadav vs State Of Punjab
2024 Latest Caselaw 17819 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Ramu Yadav vs State Of Punjab on 24 September, 2024

                                        Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:126705



CRM-M-21334-2024                 -1-


218          IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                        AT CHANDIGARH

                                                CRM-M-21334-2024
                                                Date of Decision: 24.09.2024

Ramu Yadav                                                           ...Petitioner
                                          vs.
State of Punjab                                                    ...Respondent


Coram :      Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.S.Shekhawat

Present :    Mr. Sarju Puri, Advocate
             for the petitioner.

             Mr.M.S.Bajwa, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.

                   ***

N.S.Shekhawat J. (Oral)

1. The petitioner has filed the second petition under Section 439 of

the Cr.P.C. with a prayer to grant regular bail to him in case FIR No.31 dated

24.03.2023 registered under Sections 18/61/85 of NDPS Act, at Police Station

Sadar Nawanshahr, District SBS Nagar.

2. As per case of the prosecution, the alleged recovery of 2 kilo, 600

grams of opium, which is marginally above commercial quantity, has been

recovered from the petitioner.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has

been falsely involved in the present case and is not involved in any other

criminal activity. The petitioner is in custody since 24.03.2023 and the final

report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. has already been presented against him. Trial

is likely to take long time. No useful purpose will be served by further detention

of the petitioner in custody. Thus, it is prayed that he may be released on regular

bail. In support of his contentions, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied

1 of 2

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:126705

upon 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-M-35186-2016,

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

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

opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. However,

he fairly conceded the fact that petitioner is not involved in any other criminal

activity.

5. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, custody

period of the petitioner and also the fact that the quantity of alleged contraband

is marginally above the 'commercial quantity', but without commenting on

merits of the case, I am of the considered view that the petitioner deserves the

concession of regular bail.

6. Therefore, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is

ordered to be released on regular bail on furnishing of bail/surety bonds to the

satisfaction of the trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned.

                                                 (N.S.SHEKHAWAT)
24.09.2024.                                            JUDGE
hemlata

                   Whether speaking/reasoned :       Yes/No
                   Whether reportable        :       Yes/No




                                       2 of 2