Satnam Singh v. State Of Punjab

- 1 -

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Decided on : 05.03.2025 Satnam Singh . . . Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Punjab . . . Respondent(s)

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH PRESENT: Mr. Tajeshwar Singh Sullar, Advocate for the petitioner(s).

Mr. Mohit Kapoor, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

**** SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral) 1.

The instant petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C.), for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, during the pendency of trial, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder:- Name of Petitioner(s) FIR No.

Date Section(s) Police Station District Satnam Singh 25.08.2024 305(e), 317(2) [later on City Dhuri Sangrur added] 331(4) of BNS, 2023 and 22 of NDPS Act [added later on] 2.

Allegation against the petitioner is that he has stolen 400 tablets of Buprenorphine from the Primary Health Centre. FIR was registered on 25.08.2024 and on the very same day, after arresting the petitioner, same were recovered from his conscious possession. Petitioner is aged 47 years and there is no other similar instance ever registered against him. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that looking at the poor financial condition of the petitioner, at best, prosecution can allege that the tablets were stolen by him to facilitate the others, who consume 'opium',

- 2 - as the same substance is there in the tablets. Further submits that petitioner is inside jail since 25.08.2024 and after investigation of the case, final report u/s 173 Cr.P.C. has already been submitted. However, charges are yet to be framed. Counsel also submits that since culmination of trial is likely to take long time, petitioner being the first time offender, be given a chance to rise-up and rehabilitate himself in the society.

4.

On the other hand, learned State counsel while opposing the prayer for bail, submits that the quantity recovered from the petitioner is much more than the 'commercial quantity' and such kind of offencs are at increase in the society. Therefore, petitioner does not deserve any sympathy. 5.

I have considered the submissions addressed from both the sides and noticed the fact that salt, which is present in the stolen tablets, is stated to be weighing around 39.2 grams, which is a little less than double the maximum of the 'non-commercial quantity,' i.e., 20 grams. 6.

Since the investigation is complete and all the witnesses to be examined by the prosecution are official witnesses, there are no chances of influencing the witnesses or tampering with the evidence at the instance of the petitioner.

Besides, petitioner is a first-time offender, as there is no other case of a similar nature registered against him. Therefore, I deem it appropriate to grant the concession of bail to the petitioner. 7.

Consequently, prayer made in the present petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, subject to his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/ Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Illaqa Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in

- 3 - any other case.

8.

Needless to observe that the petitioner shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witness in any manner directly or indirectly.

9.

The observation made here-in-above shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the facts of the case and the Trial Court is expected to decide the case on the basis of complete evidence available on record.

10.

Petition stands disposed of.

(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE March 05, 2025 J.Ram Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No