Punjab-Haryana High Court
Maninder Singh @ Bittu vs State Of Punjab on 17 December, 2014
Author: Inderjit Singh
Bench: Inderjit Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
(1) CRM No.M-16632 of 2014 (O&M)
Maninder Singh alias Bittu
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
...Respondent
(2) CRM No.M-26069 of 2014 (O&M)
Dalbir Singh
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
...Respondent
(3) CRM No.M-28099 of 2014 (O&M)
Tarsem Singh
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
...Respondent
(4) CRM No.M-33378 of 2014 (O&M)
Dharamveer and another
...Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab
...Respondent
Date of Decision: December 17, 2014
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH
Present: Mr.Jaspreet Singh, Advocate
for the petitioner (in CRM No.M-16632 of 2014).
Mr.Mandeep S.Sachdev, Advocate
for the petitioner (in CRM No.M-26069 of 2014).
Mr.Vipin Mahajan, Advocate
for the petitioner (in CRM No.M-28099 of 2014).
Mr.Vikram Chaudhri, Senior Advocate with
Ms.Isha Goyal, Advocate
for the petitioners (in CRM No.M-33378 of 2014).
VINEET GULATI
2014.12.24 17:36
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
Chandigarh
CRM No.M-16632 of 2014 and connected cases -2-
Ms.Reeta Kohli, Addl. Advocate General, Punjab and
Mr.Vaibhav Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab
for the respondent-State.
****
INDERJIT SINGH, J.
All these petitions are taken up together being arisen from same FIR and based on similar facts.
Petitioners have filed these petitions under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.109 dated 24.12.2013 under Sections 21, 27 and 29 of NDPS Act, registered at Police Station Lambra, District Jalandhar.
Notice of motion was issued in this case and learned State counsel appeared and contested the petitions.
As per prosecution version, FIR in the present case has been registered on 24.12.2013 on the basis of secret information that Tarsem Singh and Dalbir Singh are indulged in business of selling heroin at large scale and on that day, they on their scooter and motorcycle are coming in the area of Lambra to supply the heroin. Nakabandi was held. In the meantime, Tarsem Singh and Dalbir Singh came on scooter and they were apprehended. On search as per law, 500 grams of heroin from each of the accused was recovered. During investigation, Sandeep Singh and Dharamveer were also arrested from the Chowk Rampura Lalian, who were present there to purchase heroin from Tarsem Singh and Dalbir Singh and `70,000/- was recovered from Sandeep Singh and offence under Section 27 of the NDPS Act was added. During investigation, VINEET GULATI 2014.12.24 17:36 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh CRM No.M-16632 of 2014 and connected cases -3- Maninder Singh @ Bittu was also found involved in the present case, though, he is not named in the FIR and offence under Section 29 of the NDPS Act was added.
The challan has already been presented against the petitioners and charges have already been framed. The recovery of 500 grams of heroin each from accused Tarsem Singh and Dalbir Singh falls in commercial quantity and as per Section 37 of the NDPS Act, no bail is to be granted to an accused in the case of commercial quantity. Other accused are also involved in the commission of the offence.
Learned counsel for the petitioner cited judgments passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Uttaranchal vs. Rajesh Kumar Gupta, 2006(4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 974, SLP (Crl.) No.4976 of 2006 titled as Union of India and Pradeep Shivram Dhond and another, SLP (Crl.) No.4135 of 2010 titled as Jagdish Singh vs. Union of India and another, Criminal Appeal no.1845 of 2010 titled as Jagdish Singh vs. Union of India and another and judgment passed by Judicature at Bombay, Appellate Jurisdiction in Criminal Application No.6787 of 2005 titled as Pradeep Dhond vs. Intelligence Officer, Narcotics Control Bureau. I have gone through all the above-cited judgments and the same will not apply in the present case as no law has been laid down that bail should be granted in the case of commercial quantity. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also cited judgments passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and other High Courts, in which other accused have been VINEET GULATI 2014.12.24 17:36 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh CRM No.M-16632 of 2014 and connected cases -4- released on bail in other cases. I have gone through all the cited judgments but no law has been laid down that in case of recovery of narcotic drugs or psychotropic substance or controlled substance, bail should be granted. In each and every case, bail is to be granted keeping in view the facts of that case.
Keeping in view the prevalent situation in Punjab and menace of drugs and in view of the recovery in the present cases and without discussing the merits of the cases in minute details and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the cases, I do not find it a fit case where petitioners are entitled to benefit of grant of regular bail Therefore, finding no merit in all the petitions, the same are dismissed.
December 17, 2014 (INDERJIT SINGH)
Vgulati JUDGE
VINEET GULATI
2014.12.24 17:36
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
Chandigarh