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 1, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Sharanjit Singh @ Kala vs State Of Punjab on 18 October, 2016

Author: M.M.S. Bedi

Bench: M.M.S. Bedi

226         IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                      AT CHANDIGARH

                                             CRM-M-29479-2016
                                             Date of Decision : 18.10.2016

Sharanjit Singh @ Kaka                                       .......Petitioner
                                  versus

State of Punjab                                              ....Respondent

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI Present: Mr. Naveen Bawa, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Simsi Dhir Malhotra, DAG, Punjab.

M.M.S. BEDI, JUDGE (ORAL) Petitioner has been in custody with effect from 01.10.2015 for having been found in possession of 1900 tablets of MICROLIT containing Diphenoxylate Hydrochloride & Atropine Sulphate and 200 tablets of Prov Spas containing Dextropropoxyphene, Paracetamol and Dicvclomine as one of its ingredients besides 100 capsules of Promodext containing Dextropropoxyphene.

The petitioner had been granted the concession of interim bail on 27.07.2012. He remained on bail till 01.10.2015 when after the receipt of the report of chemical examiner, he was taken in custody.

This is second application for bail.

After considering the period of detention and the quantity of the narcotic salts recovered from the petitioner, it is not a fit case for grant of bail in view of the bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

This petition is disposed of. However, taking into consideration the period of detention, a direction is issued to the trial Court that an earnest endeavour shall be made by the trial Court for 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 29-10-2016 12:04:32 ::: CRM-M-29479-2016 -2- recording the statements of all the remaining witnesses within a period of five months after the next date of hearing and conclude the trial within the period of six months after giving fair opportunity to the petitioner to produce defence evidence. In case, for any reason, trial is not concluded within the period of six months after the next date of hearing, the trial Court will release the petitioner on bail on his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to its satisfaction.


                                                      (M.M.S. BEDI)
                                                         JUDGE
18.10.2016
Neha

             Whether Speaking/Reasoned:              Yes/No

             Whether Reportable:                     Yes/No




                                  2 of 2
               ::: Downloaded on - 29-10-2016 12:04:33 :::