Amandeep Singh Alias Aman v. State Of Punjab
!" #$%$ &'( (
!
# $%$
""
%'( $ "
' )* ( + $ " ) %* +,"
&
"
* -) %'(
,( ...
Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 64 dated 29.08.2022, registered under Sections 22 (c )/27/29 of Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (for short 'NDPS Act'), at Police Station Budhlada, District Mansa.
2.
Learned counsel contends that the petitioner is in custody for about 01 year and 06 months. the mandatory provisions of Section 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act have not been complied. The regular bail of co-accused namely Sandeep Singh @ Vicky, had already been allowed by this Court vide CRM-M-974-2024 on 28.02.2024. The petitioner is also not involved in any other case. Out of 10 prosecution witnesses, only 04 have been examined.
3.
The custody certificate dated 02.03.2024 has been filed by learned State counsel and the same is taken on record. As per the same, the petitioner is behind bars for the last 01 year 06 months and 06 days. 4.
Learned State counsel opposes the bail on the ground that the
commercial quantity of contraband was recovered from the petitioner and his co-accused, who were apprehended from the spot. He is however unable to controvert the submissions made regarding the stage of the case, no case is pending against the petitioner and the co-accused having been granted bail.
5.
Heard.
6.
Hon'ble The Supreme Court in the case of Dheeraj Kumar Shukla vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh, SLP (Criminal) No.6690/2022 decided on 25.01.2023 observed that in case of long custody period, involving quantity recovered to be of commercial nature, where the trial is yet to commence, though charges had been framed, the condition of Section 37 of NDPS Act can be dispensed with. In the case of Bhupender Singh vs. Narcotic Control Bureau (2022) 2 RCR (Crl.) 706, the Division Bench of this Court observed with regard to achieving balance between right to speedy trial guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and rigors of Section 37 of NDPS Act. Similarly, in the case of Shariful Islam @ Sarif vs. The State of West Bengal SLP (Crl.) No.4173/2022, decided on 04.08.
2022, Hon'ble The Supreme Court granted bail to the petitioner in a case of recovery of commercial quantity of contraband, considering incarceration for over 1 year and 6 months and there being no likelihood of completion of trial in the near future. In the case of Munasi Masih vs. State of Punjab, CRM-M-31504-2022, decided on 06.02.
mind the right to a speedy trial as envisaged Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
7.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in particular that the petitioner is in custody for last 1 year, 6 months and 06 days; co-accused has been granted regular bail; out of 10 prosecution witnesses, only 4 have been examined so far; the trial is likely to take a considerable time, thus further incarceration of the petitioner would be violative of his right enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the rigors of Section 37 of NDPS Act can be diluted bearing in mind the right to a speedy trial, thus, the present petition for grant of regular bail deserves to be allowed.
8.
As a result, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail, subject to his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned and subject to his not being required in any other case. The petitioner shall abide by the following conditions:- /
"
"
+ ,
%
" 3
/
"
$$%
"
"
$ ,%"
" $$ $
/
( &
" 3 %"
,
+ 6 "
& * %3 $$
$
(6 $
, & , %"
/ +0
$ 33 "
, && ,
$ 3 "
&& ,
, *
$ ,,%$ * & , $$ ,
$ $%$
,"
&
/+0
$ 33 "
,"36
,"36 , , *
%, * " "
$
" 6
$ ,8% "
&,"$
,$
$ $ " $$%
5
& $,3$ $%, &,"$ "
%"
" 6
3 ,
&& , "
+ ,
6
/+
$ 33 "
6 $%$
$ ( "6 (vii) The petitioner shall furnish his address and mobile
number to the Trial Court forthwith and shall not change the same till the conclusion of the trial and in case for any reason, the petitioner seeks to change any of the aforesaid, the same shall be done only with prior intimation to the learned Trial Court, stating the reason for the same.
/+
$ 33 "
+
,%"6 " %"
$$
" 3 %" /
" 3 %"5-%"6 $""
6
$
6 "
, * $
"
$
9.
It is made abundantly clear that in case there is any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the State shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail as granted to the petitioner by this order. 10.
In view of the above, it is clarified that the observations made herein are limited for the purpose of present proceedings and would not be construed as an opinion on the merits of the case and the trial would proceed independently of the aforesaid observations.
- .
G Arora Whether speaking/reasoned :- Yes/No Whether reportable :- Yes/No