Balwinder Kaur @ Bindu v. State Of Punjab

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

Criminal Misc. No.M-9118 of 2017 .....

Date of decision:23.3.2017 Balwinder Kaur alias Bindu

...Petitioner

v.

State of Punjab

...Respondent

....

Coram:

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

Present:

Mr. Paramjit Singh Bal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Deep Singh, Assistant 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.149 dated 4.7.2015 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 Samrala, District Ludhiana.

Notice of motion to Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. Deep Singh, learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab has put in appearance on behalf of respondent-State and contested this petition.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab appearing for the respondent-State and Harpal Singh Parmar 2017.03.28 16:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Cr. Misc. No.M-9118 of 2017 [2] have gone through the record.

As per the prosecution version, 1100 tablets each of 68 mg. containing Limotil have been recovered which fall in commercial quantity. Therefore, bar of Section 37 of the NDPS Act will apply in this case which bars for the grant of bail in case of commercial quantity 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. March 23, 2017.

(Inderjit Singh) Judge *hsp* NOTE:

Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes Whether reportable:

No Harpal Singh Parmar 2017.03.28 16:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh