Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 14 (0.29 seconds)Binder Kaur Alias Goga vs State Of Punjab on 6 February, 2020
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the
petitioner has been in custody since 25.01.2021 (1 year, 9 months and 15
days) and out of the 8 prosecution witnesses, only 3 have been examined,
thus, the trial is likely to take time. It is further submitted that the
petitioner is not involved in any other case under the NDPS Act and that
the earlier bail application of the petitioner was withdrawn on 08.02.2022
at that stage and even subsequent to the said order, a substantial period
has elapsed so as to entitle the petitioner to file the present second bail
1 of 8
::: Downloaded on - 15-11-2022 00:21:55 :::
CRM-M-28000-2022 (O&M) -2-
petition. It is also submitted that as per the FIR, the petitioner was
carrying the intoxicant tablets in a transparent polythene bag and has
submitted that it is highly unlikely for a person who has to carry
contraband, to carry the same in a transparent polythene bag and on the
basis of the said point alone, the Coordinate Benches of this Court have
granted the concession of bail to the accused persons in such cases.
Reference has been made to the various orders passed by the Coordinate
Benches of this Court i.e., order dated 02.08.2021 passed in CRM-M-
4408-2021 titled Banti Kaur @ Bhanti Kaur Vs. State of Punjab, Binder
Kaur @ Goga Vs. State of Punjab reported as 2021(3) RCR (Criminal)
360, Jaskaran Singh @ Jassu Vs. State of Punjab, reported as 2021(2)
RCR (Criminal) 837, order dated 28.02.2020 passed in CRM-M-8026-
2020 titled as Lakhwinder Singh @ Lakha Vs. State of Punjab.
Lakhwinder Singh @ Lakha And Others vs State Of Punjab on 29 July, 2009
A perusal of the above judgment would show that in fact, bail
was granted on the said point in a case where the accused was in custody
only for a period of three months. Similarly, in Lakhwinder Singh @
Lakha's case (Supra), Coordinate Bench of this Court had held has
under:-
Maulana Mohd.Amir Rashadi vs State Of U.P.& Anr on 16 January, 2012
Learned counsel for the petitioner, in rebuttal, has relied
upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Maulana Mohd. Amir
Rashadi Vs. State of U.P. and another", reported as 2012 (2) SCC 382
to contend that the facts and circumstances of the present case are to be
seen while deciding a bail application and the bail application of the
petitioner cannot be rejected solely on the ground that the petitioner is
2 of 8
::: Downloaded on - 15-11-2022 00:21:55 :::
CRM-M-28000-2022 (O&M) -3-
involved in other cases. The relevant portion of the said judgment is
reproduced hereinbelow:-
Guru Ghasidas Mandir Samiti vs Jeevan Das 40 Fa/280/2018 Smt. Vimla ... on 9 May, 2018
2. Relies upon the decision of this Court in Lakhwinder
4 of 8
::: Downloaded on - 15-11-2022 00:21:55 :::
CRM-M-28000-2022 (O&M) -5-
Singh alias Lakha vs. State of Punjab (CRM-M No.8026 of 2020) and
of Co-ordinate Benches in Binder Kaur alias Goga vs. State of Punjab
(CRM-M No.4584 of 2020) and Mandir Singh vs. State of Punjab
(CRM-M No.8035 of 2019) to contend that a person engaged in the
trade of contraband would never be expected to carry the same in any
transparent bag which would be visible to the naked eyes.
Deepinder Singh Alias Goga vs State Of Punjab on 20 January, 2020
2. Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner relies on a decision of a
Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in 'CRM-M No.4584 of 2020 - Binder
Kaur alias Goga vs. State of Punjab', to contend that it is unbelievable
that a person engaged in the business of Drug Smuggling, will carry
the contraband in a transparent Bag. The applicant, in the aforesaid
6 of 8
::: Downloaded on - 15-11-2022 00:21:55 :::
CRM-M-28000-2022 (O&M) -7-
case, in the given circumstances, considering that she was not
involved in any other case under the NDPS Act and challan against
her had already been submitted, was therefore released on bail by the
Bench after she had remained in detention for 02 months and 27 days.