Punjab-Haryana High Court
Davinder Singh vs State Of Punjab on 7 February, 2024
Author: Jasjit Singh Bedi
Bench: Jasjit Singh Bedi
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:016660
CRM-M-4251-2024 #1# 2024:PHHC:016660
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.
Date of Decision:-07.02.2024
CRM-M-4251-2024
Davinder Singh.
......Petitioner.
Vs.
State of Punjab.
......Respondent.
2
CRM-M-5301-2024
Jatinder Singh.
......Petitioner.
Vs.
State of Punjab.
......Respondent.
AND
CRM-M-5301-2024
Inder Singh.
......Petitioner.
Vs.
State of Punjab.
......Respondent.
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI
Present:- Mr. Kunal Choksi, Advocate for
Mr. S.P.S. Khaira, Advocate for the Petitioner
(in all the petitions).
Ms. Ramta K Chaudhary, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.
***
1 of 6
::: Downloaded on - 08-02-2024 07:42:19 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:016660
CRM-M-4251-2024 #2# 2024:PHHC:016660
JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J.(ORAL)
By this common order I shall dispose of all the aforementioned three petitions as the same have arisen out of one and the same FIR.
2. The brief facts of the case are that Avtar Singh (since granted bail vide order dated 19.01.2024 passed in CRM-M-1769-2024), Davinder Singh (petitioner in CRM-M-4251-2024), Inder Singh (petitioner in CRM- M-5593-2024) and Jatinder Singh (petitioner in CRM-M-5301-2024) were arrested and recovery of 3Kgs of Opium and Rs.25,000/- drug money came to be effected from the vehicle in which they were travelling.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners contend that the petitioners have 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 they were first-time offenders, in custody since 14.07.2022 and none of 16 prosecution witnesses had been examined so far, the trial of the present case was not likely to be concluded anytime soon and therefore, they were 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 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.
4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel contends that commercial quantity of contraband has been recovered from the petitioners. Therefore, in view of the bar contained under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, 2 of 6 ::: Downloaded on - 08-02-2024 07:42:19 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:016660 CRM-M-4251-2024 #3# 2024:PHHC:016660 the petitioners were not entitled to the grant of bail. She, however, concedes that the petitioners were first time offenders, in custody since 14.07.2022 and none of the 16 prosecution witnesses had been examined so far.
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.
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."
3 of 6 ::: Downloaded on - 08-02-2024 07:42:19 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:016660 CRM-M-4251-2024 #4# 2024:PHHC:016660
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. 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.
4 of 6 ::: Downloaded on - 08-02-2024 07:42:19 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:016660 CRM-M-4251-2024 #5# 2024:PHHC:016660
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. In the instant case, the petitioners are stated to be in custody since 14.07.2022 and none of the 16 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far. They are also first-time offenders with no other case registered against them. In this situation, the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act can be diluted to 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 petitioners can be considered for the grant of bail.
9. Thus without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petitions are allowed and the petitioners-Davinder Singh son of Sh. Nirmal Singh, Jatinder Singh son of Sh. Gujjar Singh and Inder Singh son of Sh. Jatinder Singh are ordered to be released on bail subject to their furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned CJM/Duty Magistrate, concerned.
10. The petitioners 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 they are not involved in any other crime other than the present case.
11. In addition, the petitioners (or anyone on their behalf) shall prepare an FDR in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- each and deposit the same with the Trial Court. The same would be liable to be forfeited as per law in case 5 of 6 ::: Downloaded on - 08-02-2024 07:42:19 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:016660 CRM-M-4251-2024 #6# 2024:PHHC:016660 of the absence of the petitioners from trial without sufficient cause.
12. The petitions stand disposed of.
( JASJIT SINGH BEDI )
JUDGE
February 07, 2023
Vinay
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:016660 6 of 6 ::: Downloaded on - 08-02-2024 07:42:19 :::