Panna Lal @ Rahul v. State Of Punjab

CRM-M-40491-2017 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-40491-2017 Date of decision: 07.12.2017 Pannal Lal @ Rahul ..... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ..... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMENDRA JAIN PRESENT: Ms. Sumanpreet Aulakh, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Bhavna Gupta, DAG, Punjab.

RAMENDRA JAIN, J. (ORAL) 1.

Through this petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C., petitionerPanna Lal @ Rahul, has prayed for grant of regular bail in case FIR No. 127 dated 01.08.2017 registered under Section 20 of the NDPS Act, Police Station Sadar, Dhuri.

2.

Learned counsel inter alia contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case. He was not arrested at the spot. The recovery in this case has not been verified by any Gazetted Officer or Magistrate. He is in custody since 01.08.2017. The conclusion of trial shall take a long time. No useful purpose would be served by detaining the petitioner in jail. Co-accused, namely; Rukmani, has already been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 23.10.2017 (Annexure P-3) passed in CRM-M-38291-2017. Thus, treating the case of the petitioner on the same parity, he be released on bail.

3.

On the other hand, learned State counsel vehemently opposed Rishu Kataria 2017.12.07 17:37 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

CRM-M-40491-2017 -2the prayer for grant of regular bail to the petitioner. 4.

I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties.

5.

Considering the overall circumstances of the case and the fact that co-accused of the petitioner, namely, Rukmani, has already been granted the concession of regular bail by this Court, the petitioner deserves the concession of regular bail.

6.

Thus, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and also that the trial is likely to take time, the instant petition is allowed and the petitioner-Panna Lal @ Rahul, is ordered to be released on regular bail pending trial, subject to his furnishing adequate bail bonds and two sound local sureties to the satisfaction of trial Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned, as the petitioner is resident of Himachal Pradesh. December 07, 2017 ( RAMENDRA JAIN ) rishu JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No Rishu Kataria 2017.12.07 17:37 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document