Baldev Singh @ Beba v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH.

CRM-M-31495-2019 (O&M).

Decided on: February 06, 2020.

Baldev Singh @ Beba .. Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Punjab .. Respondent * * *

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASGURPREET SINGH PURI * * * PRESENT Mr.Yashpal Thakur, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr.Ajay Pal Singh Gill, DAG, Punjab.

JASGURPREET SINGH PURI , J. (ORAL ) The present petition has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short the 'Cr.P.C.'), seeking regular bail in FIR No.13 dated 19.03.2019, under Section 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, registered at Police Station, Kheri Naudh Singh, Tehsil and District Fatehgarh Sahib.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has, inter alia,

argued that in the present case, the petitioner has been wrongly roped in as he was earlier allegedly involved in another case under the NDPS Act in which though the petitioner was convicted but he has already undergone the sentence awarded. He further submits that said case was of the year 2013 and that it was only because of that earlier case that the police has implicated the petitioner in the present case. He has further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 19.2.2019 and has undergone about 10 months and 15 days.

Learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Sanjeev Kumar, states that in the present case the investigation is complete and the charges have been framed. He further states that the case is fixed for prosecution evidence and 3 witnesses have already been examined. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record of the case. Considering the fact that the petitioner is in custody for the last 10 months and 15 days and after completion of investigation, the challan has been presented and charges have been framed and further that three witnesses have already been examined coupled with the fact that there is no other case pending against the petitioner, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case where the petitioner can be admitted on regular bail. Consequently, the petition is allowed. It is ordered that the petitioner shall be released on bail on his furnishing bail bond/surety bond to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

However, anything observed hereinabove shall not be

treated as an expression of opinion on merits of the case and is meant only for the purpose of decision of present petition. February 06, 2020.

(JASGURPREET SINGH PURI) raj arora JUDGE Whether speaking / reasoned Yes / No Whether reportable Yes / No