Sandeep Singh @ Soni v. State Of Punjab

 

  
        
  



 !"!

#$

%& & '


  



  


  
  CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S. GREWAL 





 !"#$ % &'' Mr. Rishabh Singla, AAG, Punjab.

H.S. GREWAL ( & )*+ 1.

This petition has been filed for grant of regular bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in case FIR No. 12 dated 23.03.2024 under Section 22 and 29 of NDPS Act, 1985 registered at Police Station Thulliwal, District Barnala.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that on 23.11.2024, 1120 tablets of salt Tramadol Hydrochloride, each weighing 370 mg, total weight comes out to be 414.4 grams, were sought to have been recovered from the petitioner.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner in his defence has annexed a CCTV footage showing the entrance of his house, wherein he was being removed from his house forcibly. The CCTV footage stands on 23.03.2024 at 9.46 a.m. and in the same CCTV footage at around

  10.03 a.m., the police is shown to be walking towards his house and the FIR registered at 12.00 noon on the same day. It is a case where the petitioner has been illegally picked up from his house and the said recovery has been planted upon him.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further apprised the Court that in compliance of order dated 05.11.2024, a copy of CCTV footage was handed over to learned State counsel for examination of the same and filing reply in that regard. In pursuance to the last order, the Investigating Officer is present in Court today. He submits that challan stands already filed. However, there is no reference to CCTV footage and no CCTV footage has been examined or refuted by the Investigating Officer. Moreover, the petitioner is in custody since 01 year and six months as on today and learned counsel prays for concession of regular bail to him. 5.

Learned State counsel has opposed the prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that in case the petitioner is granted the concession of regular bail, he will misuse the same. However, learned State counsel does not dispute the fact that no other case is pending against the petitioner. He has filed the custody certificate in the Court today and the same is taken on record. As per custody certificate, the petitioner is in custody for 01 year 05 months and 30 days. 6.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

7.

Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the petitioner is in custody for 01 year 06 months; the trial is moving at a snail's pace, the continuous detention 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 during the pendency of the trial.

8.

Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bail bonds, surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned.

9.

It is clarified that if on bail so granted through the instant order, the applicant is found indulging in any other criminal case it shall be open to the State to seek cancellation of his bail.



)H.S. GREWAL+ ()*+(*(,