High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/38947/2019dismissed

Vinay Kumar @ Tinku v. State Of Punjab

2019-10-23Mr. Justice Surinder Gupta2 pages

CRM-M-38947-2019 -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH.

Crl. Misc. No.M-38947 of 2019 (O&M) Date of Decision: October 23, 2019.

Vinay Kumar @ Tinku ..........PETITIONER(s).

VERSUS

State of Punjab ........RESPONDENT(s).

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA

Present:

Mr. Hoshiar Singh, Advocate for the petitioner (s).

Mr. Avtar Singh Sandhu, Addl.A.G., Punjab.

******* SURINDER GUPTA, J.(Oral) The present petition has been filed under Section 439 Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 54 dated 28.02.2019 registered for the offences punishable under Section 22 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, at Police Station City Khanna, District Khanna.

Heard.

The petitioner was apprehended by police party headed by inspector Sham Lal of Police Station City, Khanna on 28.02.2019, when he tried to run away on seeing the police party after throwing the plastic envelope. Due to throwing on the ground, plastic envelope got torn and was found containing 20 strips of tablets out of which 10 strips were containing 60 tablets each and other 10, 50 tablets each. The sample of tablets was sent SACHIN MEHTA 2019.10.24 17:35 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh

CRM-M-38947-2019 -2to Forensic Science Laboratory and was found to be that of drug 'Alprazolam'.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that as per the police version, strips of tablets were in a plastic envelope but when they were produced before the Magistrate, those were in a cloth bag. There is specific mention in the FIR/recovery memo that the strips along with envelope were put in a parcel, which was sealed at the spot, as such, when the case property was produced before learned Magistrate, it could not be in plastic envelope. Recovery of contraband from the petitioner is of commercial quantity, as such, no reason is made out to extend the benefit of regular bail to the petitioner. This petition has no merits. Dismissed.

( SURINDER GUPTA ) October 23, 2019 JUDGE Sachin M.

Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No SACHIN MEHTA 2019.10.24 17:35 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh