Natha Ram v. State Of Punjab

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ......

Criminal Misc. No.M-50565 of 2018 .....

Date of decision:10.01.2019 Natha Ram

...Petitioner

v.

State of Punjab

...Respondent

....

Coram:

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Inderjit Singh .....

Present:

Mr. Sardavinder Goyal, Advocate for Mr. Sumer Singh Brar, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Dhruv Dayal, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State.

.....

Inderjit Singh, J.

The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.1 dated 01.01.2018 registered for the offence under Section 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as `the NDPS Act') at Police Station Bareta, District Mansa.

Notice of motion was issued in this case.

Mr. Dhruv Dayal, learned Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab has put in appearance on behalf of respondent-State and contested this petition.

HARPAL SINGH PARMAR 2019.01.11 16:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Cr. Misc. No.M-50565 of 2018 [2] I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record. A perusal of the record shows that the recovery from the present petitioner is 2480 tablets of Sulpraz 0.5 containing the salt Alprazolam. The recovery falls in the commercial quantity. Therefore, bar of Section 37 of the NDPS Act will apply in this case and the petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of bail.

Therefore, in view of the above discussion, I do not find any merit in this petition and the same is dismissed. January 10, 2019.

(Inderjit Singh) Judge *hsp* NOTE:

Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes Whether reportable:

No HARPAL SINGH PARMAR 2019.01.11 16:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh