Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Jagjit Singh @Jeeta vs State Of Punjab on 1 October, 2020

Author: Fateh Deep Singh

Bench: Fateh Deep Singh

205          IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                       AT CHANDIGARH


                                       CRM-M-29566-2020
                                       Date of decision: 01.10.2020



Jagjit Singh @ Jeeta                                            .........Petitioner



                                   versus



State of Punjab                                             .......Respondent



CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FATEH DEEP SINGH

Present:   Mr. Bikramjeet Singh Jatana, Advocate
           for the petitioner.


FATEH DEEP SINGH, J. (ORAL)

Due to outbreak of pandemic COVID-19, the instant case is being taken up for hearing through video conferencing.

Notice of motion to the respondent-State.

Mr. Jagmohan S. Ghuman, DAG, Punjab puts in appearance and accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. Copy supplied.

In this second regular bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in a case bearing FIR No.465 dated 29.12.2019 under Sections 22 and 25 of the NDPS Act registered at Police Station Sadar Mansa, District Mansa, the accused/petitioner-Jagjit Singh @ Jeeta had prayed for grant of regular bail.

1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 08-11-2020 09:39:12 ::: CRM-M-29566-2020 -2- The arguments of Mr. Bikramjeet Singh Jatana, Advocate for the petitioner, is that there is no recovery from the person of the accused/petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner was assaulted by the police and to safeguard themselves, have fabricated the case which is well reflected from the contents of the FIR.

The learned State counsel has opposed the relief claiming that the petitioner while coming in car bearing No. HR-01AL- 7084 tried to speed away the vehicle, as a consequence of which, he received injuries. It is contended that huge quantity of intoxicating tablets numbering 2990 were recovered which disentitles him to any relief.

The prima facie allegations reflects that the petitioner, in order to run away, suffered injuries in the accident. In light of the allegations, massive quantity of commercial contraband have been recovered from the car being driven by him. The mere contention that petitioner is behind the bars for more than 08 months, is no extenuating circumstance to allow the present petition.

In view of the allegations, no cause for allowing the second bail application is made out and the same stands dismissed.




                                                    (FATEH DEEP SINGH)
01.10.2020                                                JUDGE
Neha




             Whether speaking/reasoned              :      Yes/No

             Whether reportable                     :      Yes/No

                                     2 of 2
                  ::: Downloaded on - 08-11-2020 09:39:12 :::