Amritpal Singh @ Baba v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-35464-2021 (O&M) Date of Decision:-29.3.2022 AMRITPAL SINGH @ BABA ... Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB ... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KARAMJIT SINGH Present:- Mr. Puneet Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. M.S. Nagra, AAG, Punjab.

KARAMJIT SINGH , J. (Oral) CRM-3963-2022 Keeping in view the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed and main case be taken on board today itself. CRM-M-35464-2021 (O&M) The petitioner has approached this Court seeking grant of regular bail in a case having FIR No.101 dated 8.6.2018 registered under Section 22 NDPS Act at Police Station Baghapurana, District Moga. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per the allegations appearing on the record non-commercial quantity of contraband was recovered from the possession of the petitioner who is in custody for the last 3 years and 9 months. It is further contended that it will take time for conclusion of the trial.

Present petition is contested by the State counsel, who submitted that no doubt the present case involves recovery of noncommercial quantity of contraband from the possession of the petitioner but GAURAV SOROT 2022.03.29 17:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

( 2 ) CRM-M-35464-2021 (O&M) at the same time petitioner is also involved in other cases whose details are given in the custody certificate dated 29.3.2022. I have considered the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner as well as by State counsel.

As has been admitted by both the counsel, the present case is relating to recovery of non-commercial quantity of contraband from the possession of the petitioner. As per the custody certificate, the petitioner is in custody for the last 3 years and 9 months and is also involved in other criminal cases. Admittedly the trial is going on and it will take considerable time for the trial to conclude. The pendency of other criminal cases is no ground to decline concession of grant of regular bail to the petitioner in the present case. Further, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars for an indefinite period. Keeping in view facts and circumstances mentioned above and without commenting on the merits of the case, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the CJM/Duty Magistrate concerned. ( KARAMJIT SINGH) 29.3.2022 JUDGE Gaurav Sorot Whether reasoned / speaking?

Yes / No Whether reportable?

Yes / No GAURAV SOROT 2022.03.29 17:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document