Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ramesh vs State Of Haryana on 18 November, 2024
Author: Jasjit Singh Bedi
Bench: Jasjit Singh Bedi
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:149904
CRM-M-44014-2024 #1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.
CRM-M-44014-2024
Date of Decision:-18.11.2024
Ramesh.
......Petitioner.
Versus
State of Haryana.
......Respondent.
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI
Present:- Mr. Sandeep Kotla, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr. Ashok Chaudhary, Addl. AG Haryana.
***
JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J.(ORAL)
The Prayer in this second petition under section 483 BNSS Cr.PC is for the grant of regular bail in case FIR No.73 dated 10.03.2023 under Sections 20 and 29 of NDPS Act, 1985 registered at Police Station Quilla, Panipat, District Panipat.
2. The brief facts of the case are that while the police party was on patrolling duty, secret information was received that a person travelling in a car bearing No.HP-34A-8819 was carrying Ganja leaves and would be coming to Panipat to sell the same. A Nakabandi was set up and the car was stopped. The driver of the car disclosed his name as Ramesh (petitioner). From the said vehicle 45 kgs.400 grams of Ganja leaves came to be recovered. The arrested accused Ramesh (petitioner) disclosed that one Aarif (granted bail vide order dated 01.12.2023 passed in CRM-M-59471-2023) had supplied the same to him.
1 of 6
::: Downloaded on - 21-11-2024 02:15:56 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:149904
CRM-M-44014-2024 #2
The accused Aarif who was in custody filed an application dated 10.07.2023 for interim bail for one month on medical grounds. During verification, the medical records allegedly issued by Dr. Deepak, CHC, Shamli, U.P. attached with the application for interim bail were found to be forged on the basis of enquiry conducted by the Investigating Officer in which the statement of Dr. Deepak had been recorded. The application for grant of interim bail was dismissed by the Court of A.S.J., Panipat vide order dated 17.07.2023. Thereafter, Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC were added in the case.
Ashok Arora, Advocate appearing for the accused Aarif was joined in the investigation who disclosed that the forged medical documents had been given to him by the one Aarij (since granted bail vide order dated 06.12.2023 passed in CRM-M-52142-2023) and accordingly the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. of Ashok Arora, Advocate was recorded.
On 15.07.2023, Aarij was joined in the investigation and was arrested. He disclosed that he had got prepared the forged medical certificates through Dr. Sanjay Verma.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. The mandatory provisions of Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act have not been complied with in their proper perspective. No independent witness was joined at the time of search and seizure. As he was a first-time offender, in custody since 10.03.2023 and none of the 23 prosecution witnesses had been examined so far, the trial of the present case was not likely to be concluded anytime soon and therefore, he was entitled to the concession of bail in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Nitish Adhikary @ Bapan Versus The State of West Bengal, SLP (Crl.) Nos.5769/2022 arising 2 of 6 ::: Downloaded on - 21-11-2024 02:15:56 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:149904 CRM-M-44014-2024 #3 out of judgment and order dated 04.05.2022 in CRM(NDPS) No.442/2022, decided on 01.08.2022 and Hasanujjaman & others Versus The State of West Bengal, SLP (Crl.) No.(s).3221/2023 arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 29.11.2022 in CRM(NDPS) No.1323/2022, decided on 04.05.2023, more so when the co-accused of the petitioner have been granted the concession of bail.
4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel has filed Status report by way of affidavit dated 15.11.2024 of Mr. Satish Kumar, HPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, HQ, Panipat in the court today, which is taken on record. While referring to the same he contends that commercial quantity of contraband has been recovered from the petitioner. Therefore, in view of the bar contained under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, the petitioner was not entitled to the grant of bail. He, however, concedes that the petitioner is a first time offender, in custody since 10.03.2023 and none of the 23 prosecution witnesses had been examined so far and that the co- accused of the petitioner had already been granted bail.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Nitish Adhikary @ Bapan Vs. The State of West Bengal SLP (Crl.) Nos.5769/2022 Decided on 01.08.2022 held as under:-
"As per the office report dated 29.07.2022, copy of the show cause notice along with Special Leave Petition was supplied to the Standing Counsel for the State of West Bengal and separate notice has been served on the State also. However, no one has entered appearance on their behalf.
The petitioner seeks enlargement on bail in F.I.R. No. 612 of 2020 dated 17.10.2020 filed under Section 21(c) and 37 of the NDPS 2 Act, registered at Police Station Bongaon, West Bengal.
3 of 6
::: Downloaded on - 21-11-2024 02:15:56 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:149904
CRM-M-44014-2024 #4
During the course of the hearing, we are informed that the petitioner has undergone custody for a period of 01 year and 07 months as on 09.06.2022. The trial is at a preliminary stage, as only one witness has been examined. The petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents.
Taking into consideration the period of sentence undergone by the petitioner and all the attending circumstances but without expressing any views in the merits of the case, we are inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
The petitioner is accordingly, directed to be released on bail subject to him furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.
The Special Leave Petition is disposed of on the aforestated terms.
Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of."
7. In Hasanujjaman & others Versus The State of West Bengal, SLP (Crl.) No.(s).3221/2023, decided on 04.05.2023, held as under:-
"1. There are three petitioners in this Special Leave Petition, who were accused of committing an offence under Sections 21(c)/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, `NDPS Act') in FIR No.18/2022, dated 09.01.2022, registered at Police Station Islampur, District Murshidabad, West Bengal.
2. The allegations are that when the police party intercepted the petitioners along with another person riding on two motorcycles, they were found in possession of codeine phosphate in a consignment of phensedyl bottles loaded in two nylon bags. During the search, 115 bottles (100 ml. each) of phensedyl were recovered from the joint possession of the petitioners. They were arrested on the spot and have been in custody for more than one year and four months.
3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the record.
4 of 6
::: Downloaded on - 21-11-2024 02:15:56 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:149904
CRM-M-44014-2024 #5
4. The investigation is complete; chargesheet has been filed, though the charges are yet to be framed. The conclusion of trial will, thus, take some reasonable time, regardless of the direction issued by the High Court to conclude the same within one year from the date of framing of charges. The petitioners do not have any criminal antecedents. There is, thus, substantial compliance of Section 37 of the NDPS Act.
5. In such circumstances, but without expressing any views on the merits of the case, we deem it appropriate to release the petitioners on bail subject to the terms and conditions as may be imposed by the Trial Court.
6. Additionally, it is clarified that in case the petitioners are found involved in any other case under the NDPS Act or other penal law, it shall amount to misuse of the concession of bail granted to them today, and in such a case, necessary consequences shall follow.
7. The petitioners are further directed to appear before the Trial Court regularly. In the event of they being absent, it shall again be taken as a misuse of concession of bail.
8. The Special Leave Petition stands disposed of in the above terms.
9. As a result, pending interlocutory application also stands disposed of.
(emphasis supplied)
8. Admittedly, in 'Nitish Adhikary @ Bapan (supra) and Hasanujjaman & others (supra)', the accused therein had been granted the concession of bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court after they had undergone approximately one and a half years of custody. They were also first-time offenders as is borne out from the orders.
9. In the instant case, the petitioner is stated to be in custody since 10.03.2023 and none of the 23 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far. He is also a first-time offender with no other case registered against him. In this situation, the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act can be diluted to 5 of 6 ::: Downloaded on - 21-11-2024 02:15:56 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:149904 CRM-M-44014-2024 #6 an extent in view of the salutary provisions of Article 21 of the Constitution of India which provides for the right to a speedy trial and the case of the petitioner can be considered for the grant of bail.
10. Thus without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner-Ramesh son of Sh. Roop Chand is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned CJM/Duty Magistrate, concerned.
11. The petitioner shall appear before the police station concerned on the first Monday of every month till the conclusion of the trial and inform in writing each time that he is not involved in any other crime other than the present case.
12. In addition, the petitioner (or anyone on his behalf) shall prepare an FDR in the sum of Rs.50,000/- and deposit the same with the Trial Court. The same would be liable to be forfeited as per law in case of the absence of the petitioner from trial without sufficient cause.
13. The petition stands disposed of.
( JASJIT SINGH BEDI )
JUDGE
November 18, 2024
Vinay
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
6 of 6
::: Downloaded on - 21-11-2024 02:15:56 :::