Ninderpal Singh vs State Of Haryana on 16 February, 2024

Take notes as you read a judgment using our Virtual Legal Assistant and get email alerts whenever a new judgment matches your query (Query Alert Service). Try out our Premium Member services — Free for one month.

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Ninderpal Singh vs State Of Haryana on 16 February, 2024

Author: Jasjit Singh Bedi

Bench: Jasjit Singh Bedi

                                                                               2024:PHHC:022320
                       CRM-M-7251-2024                                                     -1-


                      216        IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                                            AT CHANDIGARH


                                                                          CRM-M-7251-2024
                                                               Date of Decision : February 16, 2024



                      Ninderpal Singh                                                 .....Petitioner
                                                            Vs.
                      State of Haryana                                                ...Respondent


                      CORAM:       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI

                      Present:     Mr. Amit Choudhary, Advocate for the petitioner.
                                   Mr. Pawan Kumar Jhanda, DAG, Haryana.

                      JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. (Oral)

The prayer in the present petition under Section 439 Cr.PC is

for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.184 dated

06.08.2020 under Section 22-C and 27-A (added later on) of the NDPS Act,

1985 registered at Police Station Sadar Ratia, District Fatehabad.

2. Brief facts of the case are that petitioner-Ninderpal Singh came

to be arrested with 3000 intoxicant tablets.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the

petitioner has 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 he was a first-time offender, in custody

for the last 01 year 06 months and 17 days and only 02 out of 17 prosecution

SATISH KUMAR
2024.02.17 11:07
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
High Court Chandigarh
2024:PHHC:022320
CRM-M-7251-2024 -2-

witnesses had been examined so far, the trial of the present case was not

likely to be concluded anytime soon. Therefore, the petitioner was 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 petitioner.

Therefore, in view of the bar contained under Section 37 of the NDPS Act,

the petitioner is not entitled to the grant of bail. He, however, concedes that

the petitioner was a first time offender, in custody for the last 01 year 06

months and 17 days and only 02 out of 17 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

SATISH KUMAR
2024.02.17 11:07
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
High Court Chandigarh
2024:PHHC:022320
CRM-M-7251-2024 -3-

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.”

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
SATISH KUMAR
2024.02.17 11:07
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
High Court Chandigarh
2024:PHHC:022320
CRM-M-7251-2024 -4-

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; charge-sheet 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.

SATISH KUMAR
2024.02.17 11:07
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
High Court Chandigarh

2024:PHHC:022320
CRM-M-7251-2024 -5-

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.

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 petitioner is stated to be in custody

for the last 01 year 06 months and 17 days and only 02 out of 17 prosecution

witnesses have been examined so far. He is also a first-time offender with no

other case registered against him. 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 petitioner can be considered for the grant of

bail.

9. Thus, without commenting on the merits of the case, the present

petition is allowed and the petitioner-Ninderpal Singh son of Balwant Singh

SATISH KUMAR
2024.02.17 11:07
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
High Court Chandigarh
2024:PHHC:022320
CRM-M-7251-2024 -6-

is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds and

surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned CJM/Duty Magistrate, concerned.

10. The petitioner 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 he is not involved in any other crime other than the

present case.

11. In addition, the petitioner (or anyone on his behalf) shall prepare

an FDR in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- and deposit the same with the Trial

Court. The same would be liable to be forfeited as per law in case of the

absence of the petitioner from trial without sufficient cause.

12. The petition stands disposed of.




                                                                       ( JASJIT SINGH BEDI )
                      February 16, 2024                                       JUDGE
                      satish




                                         Whether speaking/reasoned : YES / NO

                                         Whether reportable           : YES / NO




SATISH KUMAR
2024.02.17 11:07
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
High Court Chandigarh

[ad_2]

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *