Tarsem Singh v. State Of Haryana

CRM-M-3095 of 2020 {1}

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-3095 of 2020 Date of decision:18.01.2021 Tarsem Singh ... Petitioner Vs.

State of Haryana ... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL Present:- Mr. Aditya Sanghi, Advocate and Mr. Naresh Kumar Ganga, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Rajiv Sidhu, DAG, Haryana.

SUVIR SEHGAL, J. (Oral) The Court has been convened through video conferencing due to Covid-19 pandemic.

This is the fourth petition for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.256 dated 12.06.2018 registered under Section 22(c) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short "the NDPS Act") and Section 18(C) of Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 at Police Station City Mandi, Dabwali, District Sirsa. Counsel for the parties have been heard.

A heavy recovery of 576 vials of prohibited Coxvil 10 ml each total 5760 ML and 22 Ampul Buprenorphin of 2 ml each total 44 ml, has been effected from the petitioner. Admittedly, the contraband recovered falls within the ambit of commercial quantity under the provisions of the SAVITA KADIAN 2021.01.19 14:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

CRM-M-3095 of 2020 {2} NDPS Act. Moreover, the instant petition has been filed by suppressing the fact that the petitioner is involved in other cases. From the affidavit filed by the State, it transpires that there are two other cases pending against the petitioner. The details whereof are as under:- i) FIR No.150 dated 24.07.2003 under Section 15 of NDPS Act, PS City Mandi Dabwali. (Recovery 7 kg poppy husk). ii) FIR No.152 dated 19.07.2010 under Arms Act, PS City Mandi Dabwali. (Recovery one illicit .12 bore pistol). The concession of bail is not meant for a person, who fails to disclose all the material facts before the Court. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

However, considering the fact that the trial is at an advanced stage as 09 out of total 13 prosecution witnesses have already been examined and the remaining witnesses have been summoned for 12.02.2021, the trial Court shall make an endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously. It is expected that the petitioner will extend full co-operation to the trial Court and will not cause any delay in the conclusion of the trial. With theses observations, the petition stands disposed of. (SUVIR SEHGAL) JUDGE January 18, 2021 savita Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No SAVITA KADIAN 2021.01.19 14:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh