Bablu Alias Bablu Kumar Vishwakarma v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Decided on : 08.08.2024 BABLU ALIAS BABLU KUMAR VISHWAKARMA . . . Petitioner(s)

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB . . . Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE KIRTI SINGH PRESENT: Mr. Prateek Pandit, Advocate for the petitioner(s).

Mr. Vinay Kumar, DAG, Punjab.

**** KIRTI SINGH , J. (Oral) The jurisdiction of this Court under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been invoked for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.20 dated 31.01.2024 registered under Sections 18, 29 of NDPS Act (Section 29 of NDPS Act added later on), registered at Police Station Basti Bawa Khel, District Jalandhar.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is alleged in the FIR that 5 kgs of opium was recovered from five persons, however alleged recovery from the petitioner is 1 kg of opium which falls under the non commercial quantity. He further submits that petitioner was involved in one case under NDPS Act, in which he stands acquitted. 3.

Further, reliance has been placed upon the order dated 05.05.2023 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in CRM-M21794-2023 titled as Sandeep Singh vs. State of Punjab and he further submits that co-accused has been granted benefit of regular bail vide order dated 15.07.2024 in CRM-M-16352-2024.

4.

Learned State counsel has filed the custody certificate dated 07.08.2024 in Court today, which is taken on record. As per custody

- 2 - certificate, the petitioner has undergone an actual custody of 06 months and 04 days and there is one case registered against him under NDPS Act in which he stands acquitted. Moreover, on instructions he submits that charges have been framed on 31.07.2024 and out of 14 prosecution witnesses, none has been examined till date. However in view of the serious allegations against the petitioner, he is not entitled to the concession of regular bail. 6.

Heard.

7.

The veracity of the allegations leveled against the petitioner shall be established during the course of the trial. The quantity recovered from her falls under the non-commercial quantity and he is involved in one case in which he has been acquitted. The petitioner has undergone an actual custody of 06 months and 04 days. Out of 14 prosecution witnesses, none has been examined. The trial of the case will take considerable time and no useful purpose will be served by detaining the accused in custody. 8.

Without commenting anything on the merits of the case, lest it may prejudice the trial, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on her furnishing adequate bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate. The petitioner shall also abide by the following conditions:- (I) The petitioner will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (II) The petitioner will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(s).

(III) The petitioner will appear before the trial Court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

(IV) The petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which she is accused of, or for commission of which she is suspected.

(V) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to

- 3 - any police officer or tamper with the evidence. 9.

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of bail before this Court.

10.

However, nothing stated above shall be construed as a final expression of opinion on the merits of the case and the trial Court would proceed independently of the observations made in the present case which are only for the purpose of adjudicating the present bail petition. (KIRTI SINGH) JUDGE 08.08.2024 Kavita Nain Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No