Chamkaur Singh @ Chamku v. State Of Punjab

  

 


 
 
 

  











!

"#$#%
&'' CHAMKAUR SINGH @ CHAMKU  

 














 ()
'
*

+


*'
, -----



  !"# $
% &#









'

 
 











 # (#
 # "#$
)$
!

*#+

,,,,,
+


*'
,.
'
/0  

 
 
 

' -
!

&

./0
'
 
1 
'
"

#-


&!

$
20/
'

3 # 
'
3!-#
+# -

&#
+#

3
4
 

0.
#
5552

!

&

2
'
 
# &  &
!3
6
7&

 &
!+# &
&$
2089
#
 - &
#

1 7
# $
  &
#

# # $
!

*#+




 
&#
'
 


&!

$
 
 - &
# 7
:#

#

-- 3
!7

# &
'
+#
-" 
: 
 7

 &




& "

3
'

"
'


- 3
 "
#
 -7  
+#3

 3
 
 - &
# 7$

# &(
# 
 

&#
+7
:#-( 3
#:#7
'#-7
 


:#
#   
: 
 
-
'
&

'' & #-
:  !


 &- 

#"
#
1 #"(#!

 3
#- #
1 #"(!
; 
 

 <

-2- =  3
#  

 #
 
 

:#
&#

= &# !+# &$

:#
3 %
# ''

+
# & 
+7
#
#3  #

#
)#>
'' &
:  !


= & 
 


'
+ 3
# & 
+7
)#>
'' & 
 
&

 
""

'
 
 

:#
&


# 
 
!7
!

 
'
 - &$
!+
 % 

#
:#
&#--
!



#&
#
 
 
?
#& 
 
 
6

!&
"-'
'
 &- 
  7

 
 

# 
&

 3

&

 $
 
& &( 3
:#
!

#( 
''


# 
#

#%
+
"#

*

 
:  $
:% $
 7
= 
  #+ - 7

# & #
 
 -7  
+#3
:#
 
#(
'

"
 
# 
'
 
 

# 
 
#"
:#
 
4
:#
'

!


&

#

3


: 3 3
#+ !
5
3 #"
 
#"
:#
!-7
#-

#
# &-
# 
# #
#"-
: 
#-
 #:


 
#"-
#
:--
#
 
"#

= &# 
: 
 
#(
 - &
&! 7
 
4

@!

:#
  !


#3# 
 
 


 
+# -
 


# - 
' -
: 
:   #:


/
4
#
+
#%



 
 
 

 #
 
 




% -%

# 7
 
&#

# 7
&#

  3
#3# 
"

# 7
!


'
& " 
*!

 &


4

'!

 
#%


 #




#


&-# "
'' 
?

:% $
#
&! 7
&  ' &#
:#


!&
+7
 
- &
: 

:#



!
 #

555/
 #
#
"# 7
#
5

 
&#

#
+ 
#3# 
 
 

'
: &
5
 # 
  

&


.
!

-
'

 
 

 #7
'

 "
 "

% '7
 
#"
 
#

 
&#
:#
#&&

 3-7
'






-7
+7
:#7
'
#'' #% 
'
# #"
 3 $
$
!7
!

 
'
 - &$

-3- !+
 % 

# $
  &
#

# #
:#
#-
' -
  #' $
  #  
#

3#  3
 
 

+ 3
#
#+ !#-
'' 
 
# -

'
 
&#

#3# 
 
 

# 
= #&
#
!

*0'

'
 
'
%!

0
* "

#% 1#"

*

#%

*

2
4
 
8
#
059520

2A2A89
'
 

&

1 7
#


 #-

4
 
25
#
05520

2A2A89
'
 

&

1 7
#


 #-
/
4
 
8
#
552

.22A.2.

'
41
6
29A2A2A0A '
 

&
6
9
'
 
 "
&

1 7
#


 #-
.
4
 
29
#
.5528

A2A89
'
 

&

1 7
#


 #-
9
4
 
8
#
5.5/52

25
'
41

1 7
#


 #-

4
 

#
25/5

28AA2A89
'
 

&
6
9 
'
 

&
)

:#-
# +


 #-

4
 
0.
#
5552

2

'
 

&

1 7
#


 #-
9
!

-
'

 
 

&

 
 #
 
 

#
+

&! 7
'

#



'
52
7# 
# 
50
"

 

 
 
&#
# 
 #


  -

 
&

&

'
 
+# -
?
'!

 
&

 
 #
 
%  &

 
&#
#


7
& "" &
# 
 
&

&-!

'
 
 #-

- (-7

#(
#
-

3
 "

6.

Per contra, learned State counsel contends that the antecedents of the petitioner do not inspire any confidence. Commercial quantity of heroin has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner.

-4She contends that the FSL report pertaining to the contraband had already been received and the salt in the parcel was found to be having ingredients of "Diacetylmorphine=40.15%. The final report under Section 173 (2) of the Cr.P.C. has already been filed and that the case was earlier listed for framing of charge on 24.03.2023. She submits that the bar of Section 37 of the NDPS Act would be applicable against the petitioner considering his involvement in a large number of cases. She also contends that notwithstanding such large number of cases registered against the petitioner, he has deliberately made a mis-declaration in Para No. 15 of the present petition wherein it is averred that the petitioner is neither involved in NDPS nor in any other case and that no cases are pending against him in any Court of competent jurisdiction. The aforesaid declaration being false, the petitioner does not deserve any concession from this Court.

7.

I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respective parties.

8.

Taking into consideration the undisputed claim of the respondent-State that as many as 07 different cases including 06 under the NDPS Act have already been registered against the petitioner and further being alleged that commercial quantity of contraband has been recovered from his conscious possession. The claim of the parties is not being gone into or commented upon at this stage lest it may prejudice the rights of the respective parties. Not only has the petitioner made a mis-declaration in the present petition about his criminal antecedents but commercial quantity has also been recovered from him. Section 37 of the NDPS Act would be prima facie attracted in the present case. The present petition is accordingly

-5dismissed. However, taking into consideration, the totality of circumstances as also the period of custody already undergone by the petitioner, the respondent prosecution is directed to conclude the prosecution evidence within a period of 06 months from the date next fixed for recording of prosecution evidence.


/+


*'
,2


&.





  B  
#( 3A #



CA B  


#+-

CA