Harpal Singh @ Happy v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-25491 of 2015 Date of Decision: 10.8.2015 Harpal Singh @ Happy --Petitioner.

Vs.

State of Punjab --Respondent.

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK Present : Mr. Vipin Mahajan, Advocate for the petitioner.

**** RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK J. (ORAL) Petitioner seeks bail pending trial in FIR No.30 dated 21.2.2013 under Sections 21/22/61/85/27-A of the NDPS Act, registered at Police Station City Gurdaspur.

Notice to the Advocate General, Punjab.

On the asking of the Court, Mr. K.D.Sachdeva, Additional A.G. Punjab, accepts notice.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. No recovery was effected from the petitioner. He further submits that a period of more than 21⁄2 years has elapsed, but trial has not been concluded so far. He prays for allowing the present petition.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State, on instructions from H.C.Rajinder Singh, submits that petitioner has been found involved in as many as 10 more cases and that too, AMIT KUMAR 2015.08.11 09:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

under NDPS Act itself. So far as trial of the present case is concerned, out of total 10 prosecution witnesses, seven have already been examined and remaining three will be examined on the next date of hearing, i.e. 17.8.2015. He concluded by submitting that since trial is likely to concluded within reasonable time, petitioner is not entitled for the concession of bail pending trial. He prays for dismissal of the present petition.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, after careful perusal of the record of the case and giving thoughtful consideration to the rival contentions raised, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner is not entitled for the concession of bail pending trial. It is so said, because petitioner has been found involved in as many as 10 FIRs and trial is also about to conclude.

In view of the above and without commenting anything further on the merits of the case, lest it should prejudice the rights of either of the parties, no case for bail pending trial is made out. Dismissed.

(RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK) JUDGE 10.8.2015 Ak Sharma AMIT KUMAR 2015.08.11 09:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document