Punjab-Haryana High Court
Bahadur Singh vs State Of Punjab on 1 September, 2014
Author: Mehinder Singh Sullar
Bench: Mehinder Singh Sullar
CRM No. M-28786 of 2014 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Criminal Misc. No. M-28786 of 2014
Date of decision: - 1.9.2014
Bahadur Singh
..Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
..Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR
Present: Mr.Parveen K.Kataria, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr.R.P.S. Sidhu, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab
for the State.
Mehinder Singh Sullar, J. (Oral)
The petitioner has directed the instant petition, for the grant of concession of regular bail, in a case registered against him, vide FIR No.67 dated 9.8.2012(Annexure P1), on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 21 & 22 of The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the NDPS Act') and 27 of The Drugs & Cosmetics Act, 1940, by the police of Police Station Chamkaur Sahib, District Rupnagar.
2. Notice of the petition was issued to the State.
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, going through the record with their valuable assistance and considering the entire matter deeply, to my mind, there is no merit in the present petition in this respect.
4. Ex facie, the arguments of learned counsel that only the ARVIND SHARMA 2014.09.02 17:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM No. M-28786 of 2014 2 manufactured tablets/capsules & liquid drugs were recovered from the possession of petitioner and since no offence is made out under the NDPS Act, so, he is entitled to the concession of regular bail, sans merit.
5. Concisely, the prosecution, inter-alia, claimed that, on 9.8.2012 at about 2 PM, a police party headed by ASI Darshan Singh was present at check-post of Bus-stand, Salahpur (place of recovery) for patrolling, in the meantime, one red coloured motorcycle, bearing registration No.PB-43-D- 3902, came from the side of village Khokhra. One plastic bag was hanging on it. The IO signaled to stop, but he tried to turn back. On the basis of suspicion, the petitioner was apprehended. Thereafter, IO had sent a writing (ruqqa) to the police station for registration of the case in this regard. The higher authorities were also accordingly informed by him.
6. Having completed all the codal/statutory formalities, the plastic bag was searched by the Investigating Officer and in the wake of search, 1000 intoxicant tablets, 50 capsules of Parvon Spas and 4500 ML liquid intoxicant were recovered from the possession of petitioner, without any valid license or permit. After following the due procedure, the samples and remaining drugs were stated to have been separately sealed and taken into possession, by virtue of recovery memo by the police. In the background of these allegations and in view of the recovery of commercial quantity of indicated drugs, the present case was registered against the petitioner, in the manner described here-in-above.
7. It is not a matter of dispute that, the question as to whether the recovery of pointed commercial quantity of such drugs and psychtoropic substance, without any permit or license, constitute the offences under Sections 21 & 22 of the NDPS Act, is no more res-integra and is now well ARVIND SHARMA 2014.09.02 17:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM No. M-28786 of 2014 3 settled. An identical point came to be decided by this Court in cases Vinod Kumar Versus State of Punjab, 2013(1) RCR(Criminal) 428 and Parmanand and others v. State of Haryana, 2014(1) RCR (Criminal)
478.
8. Having considered the relevant provisions of the NDPS Act and rules framed thereunder, it was ruled that in such circumstances, the offences punishable under the NDPS Act are made out against the accused. Not only that, the same very view was reiterated by Hon'ble Supreme Court in a recent judgment in case Union of India & Another v. Sanjeev V.Deshpande Criminal Appeal No.660 of 2007, decided on 12.8.2014, a Division Bench of this Court in a bunch of cases decided, vide main CRM No. M-13140 of 2012 titled as "Inderjeet Singh @ Laddi v. State of Punjab"
on 31.1.2014 and Rupesh Singla and another Vs. State of Punjab, decided on 21.08.2014, by virtue of petition, bearing CRM-M No.22171 of 2006. Therefore, the contrary arguments of learned counsel for petitioner "stricto sensu" deserve and are hereby repelled under the present set of circumstances as the ratio of law laid down in the indicated judgments "mutatis mutandis" is applicable to the facts of this case and is the complete answer to the problem in hand.
9. Now adverting to the another submission of learned counsel that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case, lacks merit. It may be added that it is highly improbable to believe that the police will plant such a huge quantity of narcotic drugs & psychotropic substances on him. On the contrary, no motive could possibly be attributed as to why the police would falsely implicate the petitioner in the present case. As the commercial quantity of drugs and psychotropic substances in question were ARVIND SHARMA 2014.09.02 17:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM No. M-28786 of 2014 4 recovered from his possession, without any permit or license, fully attracting the bar to bail, as contemplated under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to the concession of regular bail, as contrary urged on his behalf.
10. No other legal point, worth consideration, has either been urged or pressed by the learned counsel for the parties.
11. In the light of aforesaid reasons and without commenting further anything on merits, lest it may prejudice the case of either side during the course of the trial of the main case, as there is no merit, therefore, the instant petition for regular bail filed by the petitioner is hereby dismissed as such, in the obtaining circumstances of the case.
12. Needless to mention that nothing observed, here-in-above, would reflect on the merits of the main case, in any manner, as the same has been so recorded for a limited purpose of deciding the present petition for regular bail only.
1.9.2014 (Mehinder Singh Sullar)
AS Judge
ARVIND SHARMA
2014.09.02 17:29
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Chandigarh