Mahesh Kumar v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

Reserved on: 06.03.2025

Pronounced on: 25.03.2025 Mahesh Kumar

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

Present:

Mr. P.S. Sekhon, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Akshay Kumar, AAG, Punjab.

**** ANOOP CHITKARA, J.

FIR No.

Dated Police Station Sections 14.10.2016 Patran, District 18 of NDPS Act Patiala 1.

The petitioner incarcerated in the FIR captioned above had come up before this Court under Section 439 CrPC (483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023), [BNSS], seeking regular bail.

2.

In paragraph 14 of the bail petition, the accused declares that he has no criminal antecedents, however, as per custody certificate dated 05.03.2025, the accused has the following criminal antecedents:

Sr. No.

FIR No.

Date Offenses Police Station 20.09.2010 356, 379, 34 IPC Fatehgarh Sahib 03.02.2009 379/411 IPC Sadar Sangrur 3.

The facts and allegations are that on 14.10.2016, based on secret information recovery, the Police seized 500 gram opium from petitioner's possession. The Investigator claims to have complied with all the statutory requirements of the NDPS Act, 1985, and CrPC, 1973.

4.

The petitioner's counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent conditions and contends that further pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and their family. He further submits that petitioner was on bail earlier and in

the interregnum he jumped the bail and now he is in custody from 02.01.2025. He further undertakes to appear on all dates before the trial Court. 5.

The State's counsel opposes bail.

REASONING:

6.

The petitioner was earlier on bail; however, he failed to appear, which led to the cancellation of the bail vide order dated 07.02.2024, passed by Judge, Special Court, Patiala.

7.

The petitioner was earlier granted bail, and as such, this court is inclined to grant bail subject to the strict condition that the petitioner shall not remain absent from the trial even on a single day.

8.

Given the penal provisions invoked viz-a-viz pre-trial custody, coupled with the primafacie analysis of the nature of allegations, and the other factors peculiar to this case, there would be no justifiability for further pre-trial incarceration at this stage. 9.

Without commenting on the case's merits, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, and for the reasons mentioned above, the petitioner makes a case for bail. CONDITIONS:

10.

Given above, provided the petitioner is not required in any other case, the petitioner shall be released on bail in the FIR captioned above subject to furnishing bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned Court and due to unavailability before any nearest Ilaqa Magistrate/duty Magistrate. Before accepting the surety, the concerned Court must be satisfied that if the accused fails to appear, such surety can produce the accused. 11.

While furnishing a personal bond, the petitioner shall mention the following personal identification details:

1.

AADHAR number 2.

Passport number (If available) and when the attesting officer/court considers it appropriate or considers the accused a flight risk.

3.

Mobile number (If available) 4.

E-Mail id (If available) 12.

This order is subject to the petitioner's complying with the following terms. 13.

The petitioner shall attend the Trial on every date and shall not seek any adjournment.

14.

Any observation made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments. 15.

A certified copy of this order would not be needed for furnishing bonds, and any Advocate for the Petitioner can download this order along with case status from the

official web page of this Court and attest it to be a true copy. If the attesting officer wants to verify its authenticity, such an officer can also verify its authenticity and may download and use the downloaded copy for attesting bonds. 16.

Petition allowed in terms mentioned above. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 25.03.2025 anju rani Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable:

No.