Varinder Singh @ Bholu v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-55021-2024 Date of decision: November 11th, 2024 Varinder Singh @ Bholu .....Petitioner

Versus

The State of Punjab .....Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present:

Mr. Arshdeep Singh Sra, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Mohit Kapoor, Additional Advocate General, Punjab. MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL) Learned counsel for the petitioner is seeking the concession of regular/interim bail in FIR No.89 dated 15.07.2024 under Section 22 of the NDPS Act registered at Police Station Urban Estate, District Patiala, on the ground that FSL report has still not been received and, therefore, the petitioner deserves to be enlarged on regular/interim bail.

2.

Learned counsel has further submitted that no doubt, the petitioner is involved in seven other criminal cases including cases under the NDPS Act (hereinafter called 'Act'), however, keeping in view the fact that the investigation is still pending, he deserves to be enlarged on bail, more so, when now he is in custody since 15.07.2024. 3.

Learned State counsel at the outset has vehemently opposed the prayer and submissions made by the counsel opposite by submitting that the petitioner was apprehended at the spot and a recovery of 235 tablets of Alprazolam weighing 28.4 grams was affected from him, that too after due compliance of all the mandatory provisions of the Act. It has PUNEET SACHDEVA 2024.11.12 15:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CRM-M-55021-2024 -2been still further submitted by the learned counsel for the State that it is a matter of record that the petitioner is involved in multiple criminal cases including cases under the NDPS Act; he was apprehended in the present case while he was on bail in the other cases, which were already pending against him, which left no manner of doubt that he had misused the concession of bail granted to him in the other criminal cases. Learned State counsel has, on further instructions, disputed the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner that FSL report has not been received and filed. It has been submitted that in fact not only has the FSL report been received but even challan presented on 20.09.2024; charges are likely to be framed on the next date of hearing i.e. 18.11.2024.

4.

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

5.

In view of the challan already being presented on 20.09.2024, coupled with the involvement of the petitioner in multiple criminal cases including cases under the NDPS Act, he does not deserve to be extended the concession of regular/interim bail as prayed for more so when only 11 witnesses have been cited by the prosecution and hence, the trial would not take much time to conclude.

6.

Accordingly, the instant petition stands dismissed. 7.

However, it is made clear that anything observed hereinabove shall not be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

November 11th, 2024 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Puneet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes Whether reportable :

No PUNEET SACHDEVA 2024.11.12 15:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh