Harjinder Singh v. State Of Punjab
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH 210-2 CRM-M-16931-2023 (O&M) Date of decision: 21.07.2023 Harjinder Singh ..Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab ..Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY
Present:
Mr. Rajiv K. Saini, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Manipal Singh Atwal, DAG, Punjab.
*** AMAN CHAUDHARY, J.
1.
The present petition has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No.01 dated 21.01.2022, registered under Sections 21,25,27-A, 29 of NDPS Act, Section 25 of Arms Act and Sections 120 and 120-B IPC, at Police Station State Special Operation Cell, District Amritsar.
2.
Learned counsel contends that the petitioner is in custody for the last 3 years and 23 days. No recovery has been effected from him. His name has surfaced based on the disclosure statement of Gurmukh Singh, wherein it has been alleged that he is working along with the petitioner and co-accused Harwinder Singh, both of whom have been granted bail by this Court vide order of even date. The petitioner is not involved in any other case under NDPS Act. Though the charges stand framed on 07.10.2022 but only 2 out of 25 prosecution witnesses have been examined.
3.
Learned State counsel opposes the bail on the ground that the petitioner is a part of the drug cartel alongwith co-accused Gurmukh Singh. He is however unable to controvert the submissions made regarding the custody, stage of the trial and the petitioner not being involved in any other case under NDPS Act.
4.
Heard.
5.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in particular that the petitioner is in custody for almost 3 year and 23 days; not involved in any other case under NDPS Act; co-accused-Gurmukh Singh and Harwinder Singh have been granted bail vide order of even date; charges have been framed on 07.10.2022; 2 out of 25 witnesses have yet been examined; the trial is likely to take a considerable time, thus his further incarceration would not serve any useful purpose, the present petition for grant of regular bail deserves to be allowed. 6.
As a result, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail, subject to his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned and subject to his not being required in any other case. The petitioner shall abide by the following conditions:- (i) The petitioner will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii) The petitioner will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The petitioner will appear before the trial Court on each and every date fixed, unless is exempted by a specific order of Court.
(iv) The petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which, he is an accused, or for commission of which he is suspected of.
(v) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly coerce, induce, threaten or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence in any manner.
(vi) The petitioner shall not in any manner misuse his liberty.
(vii) The petitioner shall furnish his address and mobile number to the Trial Court forthwith and shall not change the same till the conclusion of the trial and in case for any reason, the petitioner seeks to change any of the aforesaid, the same shall be done only with prior intimation to the learned Trial Court, stating the reason for the same.
(viii) The petitioner shall not leave the country without prior permission of the trial Court.
(ix) The trial Court/Duty Magistrate may impose any other condition, as deemed appropriate while releasing the petitioner.
7.
It is made abundantly clear that in case there is any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the State shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail as granted to the petitioner by this order. 8.
In view of the above, it is clarified that the observations made herein are limited for the purpose of present proceedings and would not be construed as an opinion on the merits of the case and the trial would proceed independently of the aforesaid observations. ( AMAN CHAUDHARY ) 21.07.2023 JUDGE ashok Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable :
Yes/No