Punjab-Haryana High Court
Hardev Singh @Babbu vs State Of Punjab on 9 April, 2013
Author: Ram Chand Gupta
Bench: Ram Chand Gupta
CRM No.M-37194 of 2012 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Crl. Misc. No. M- 37194 of 2012(O&M)
Date of Decision: April 9, 2013.
Hardev Singh @Babbu
...... PETITIONER(s)
Versus
State of Punjab
...... RESPONDENT (s)
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA
Present: Mr. H.S.Batth,
Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Deepak Garg, AAG, Punjab.
*****
RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral)
The present petition has been filed for regular bail under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure in FIR no.52 dated 16.03.2012, under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, registered at police Station A-Division, District Amritsar City.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record including the impugned order passed by learned Judge, Special Court, Amritsar dismissing bail application filed by the petitioner.
It has been contended by learned counsel for petitioner-accused CRM No.M-37194 of 2012 2 that recovery effected from him is non-commercial and that he has been continuing in custody since 16.03.2012.
However, it has been contended by learned counsel for respondent-State that as per notification dated 18.11.2009 issued by the Central Government, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue in exercise of power conferred by clauses (viia) and (xxiiia) of Section 2 of the NDPS Act, the entire quantity is to be seen for determining as to whether the recovered quantity comes within the definition of commercial or non- commercial. It is further contended that as per report of Chemical Examiner average weight per tablet is 0.078 grams and that there is recovery of total 1000 tablets from petitioner-accused and hence, total recovery comes to 78 grams, which is more than 50 grams and that the same contains Diphenoxylate Hydrochloride. As per entry 44 of the notification dated 09.10.2001 more than 50 grams of Diphenoxylate hydrochloride is commercial. Hence, in view of bar created under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, petitioner is not entitled for bail.
In view of these facts and without expressing anything on the merit of the case, I am of the view that it is not such a case in which concession of bail should be granted to the accused. There is no merit in the instant application for bail filed by Hardev Singh @Babbu. The same is, hereby, dismissed.
( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) April 9, 2013. JUDGE 'om'