Vicky v. State Of Punjab

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : 28.05.2025 VICKY ... Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB .. Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S. GREWAL Present:- Mr. Vipin Mahajan, Advocate for the petitioner.

*** H.S. Grewal, J. (Oral) 1.

This is a petition for regular bail filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) in FIR No.18 dated 08.04.2024 under Sections 21(C), 23 and 29 of NDPS Act, 1985 (Sections 23, 29 of NDPS Act added later on) registered at Police Station Dorangla, District Gurdaspur, Punjab.

  The case of the prosecution is that during patrolling, police party alongwith BSF officials recovered a packet in the fields of Nirmal Singh which was found to be containing 530 grams of Heroin on the basis of secret information. Thereupon, after a period of 04 months, i.e. on 30.08.2024 the secret informer disclosed the name of the present petitioner alongwith his brother Tarzan for smuggling of the aforesaid 530 grams of Heroin. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner alongwith his brother Tarzan was arrested on 31.08.2024, however, no recovery

-2has been effected from the petitioner. He further contends that his co-accused namely, Tarzan has already been granted the concession of regular bail vide order dated 24.10.2024 (Annexure P-4) passed by this Court. He further contends that the petitioner has undergone custody for a period of 08 months and 23 days.

3.

Notice of motion.

4.

Mr. Manvir Singh Toor, AAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and 



                   


          

   

 ! " "      5.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the material placed on record.

6.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case, and the fact that custody period undergone by the petitioner in the present case is 08 months and 23 days, therefore, no useful purpose would be served to further detain the petitioner in jail and since the conclusion of the trial is likely to take a long time and as such, further incarceration of the petitioner would not serve the ends of justice. Therefore, this Court deems it a fit case to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner. 7.

Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner is granted concession of regular bail in the present case, on his furnishing requisite bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/ Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned. The pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

-38.

It is however, made clear that in case during his bail, the petitioner indulges in any offence, the State shall be at liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail of the petitioner.

28th May, 2025 (H.S. GREWAL) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether Reportable :

Yes/No