High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/32424/2020dismissed

Desraj Singh Alias Dassa v. State Of Punjab

2020-10-16Mr. Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi2 pages

CRM No. M-32424-2020

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH (215) CRM No. M-32424-2020 Date of Decision : 16.10.2020 DESRAJ SINGH ALIAS DASSA ....Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB .....Respondent (through video conferencing) CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI Present:- Ms. Kamalpreet Kaur Dhaliwal, Advocate for Mr. Jasvir Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sandeep Singh Deol, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. *** Harsimran Singh Sethi, J. (Oral) The present petition has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No. 226 dated 01.08.2019, under Section 22 of the NDPS Act, 1985, registered at Police Station Talwandi Sabo, District Bathinda.

Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the petitioner has been falsely roped in the present case and further argues that as the charges have already been framed, no useful purpose will be served in keeping the petitioner behind the bars, he may kindly be granted the concession of regular bail.

Learned State counsel submits that the recovery of the banned substance, which is commercial in nature, has been done from the petitioner NARESH KUMAR 2020.10.16 18:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CRM No. M-32424-2020 and though the charges have already been framed qua him, keeping in view the recovery of commercial quantity of the banned substance from the petitioner, which is a heinous offence and if found guilty, the minimum imprisonment is not less than 10 years, the petitioner is not entitled for the grant of regular bail.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record with their able assistance. As per the allegations alleged against the petitioner, the recovery of the banned substance is of commercial in nature. As per the allegations, 800 intoxicant tablets were recovered from the petitioner, the trial is at the initial stage and even prosecution witnesses are yet to be examined.

That being so, no ground is made out to grant the petitioner the benefit of regular bail at this stage.

Dismissed.

However, it is made clear that anything observed herein shall not be construed to be an expression of any opinion on the merits of the case.

October 16, 2020 ( HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI ) kanchan/naresh.k JUDGE Whether reasoned/speaking?

Yes/No Whether reportable?

Yes/No NARESH KUMAR 2020.10.16 18:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh