Parabjot Singh @ Babba v. State Of Punjab

-1In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Date of Decision: 27.7.2021 Parabjot Singh @ Babba ......Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL

Present:

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

Mr. Avtar Singh Sandhu Addl. A.G., Punjab.

**** HARNARESH SINGH GILL , J. (ORAL) Case is taken up for hearing through video conferencing. CRM-19232-2021 This is an application under Section 482 CPC for preponement of the main case, which is fixed for hearing on 12.10.2021. Notice of the application.

On the asking of the Court, Mr. Avtar Singh Sandhu Addl. A.G., Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the State. Learned counsel for the applicant-petitioner prays that the date of hearing in the main case may be preponed from 12.10.2021 and the case may be taken up for final disposal today itself.

Learned State counsel does not have any objection to the prayer made by the learned counsel for the applicant-petitioner. For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed. Main case is preponed from 12.10.2021 and is taken up on board for hearing today itself.

-2CRM-M-16593-2021 The petitioner seeks regular bail in FIR No. 42 dated 10.6.2020 under Section 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 registered at Police Station Sudhar District Ludhiana (Rural). Custody certificate by way of affidavit of Deputy Superintendent, Central Prison, Ludhiana dated 27.7.2021 has been filed through e-mail. Copy of the same is taken on record. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the alleged recovery of intoxicant tablets was effected from a bag, which was lying on the floor, 30 feet away from the petitioner. He further submits that the petitioner has been in custody for the last 01 year, 01 month and 10 days and there is no other case against him.

On the other hand, learned State counsel, while opposing the bail application, submits that 1000 tablets of Clovidol-100-SR (Tramadol) were recovered from the petitioner which falls under the commercial quantity. He further submits that in the present case, charges have been framed and out of 12 prosecution witnesses, none has been examined. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. As per the custody certificate, the petitioner has been in custody for the last 01 year, 01 month and 10 days and no other case is pending against him. Charges have been framed but out of 12 prosecution witnesses, none has been examined yet. The trial will take time to conclude because of Covid-19 pandemic. No useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars.

Without commenting anything on the merits of the case, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his

-3furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate.

(HARNARESH SINGH GILL) JUDGE July 27, 2021 Gurpreet Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No