The High Court of Punjab & Haryana dismissed an application for regular bail filed under Section 15 of the N.D.P.S. Act. The court held that due to the commercial quantity of contraband involved, Section 37 applicable, bail was not granted, distinguishing Chinder case.
Bail petition dismissed; petitioner not entitled to regular bail.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
CRM No. M-32214 of 2008 1
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
CRM No. M-32214 of 2008 (O&M) Date of decision: 16.03.2009
Paramjit Kaur ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA
Present: Mr. Jagjit Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Shailesh Gupta, DAG, Punjab.
Rajan Gupta, J.
This is a petition for grant of regular bail in a case registered at Police Station Mehatpur, Jalandhar, under Section 15 of N.D.P.S. Act, vide FIR No.83 dated 12th July, 2008.
The allegation in the FIR is that a raid was conducted at the house of the petitioner and two bags of poppy husk each containing 35 Kgs thereof, was recovered.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that no independent witness was associated at the time of recovery and no useful purpose will be served by keeping the petitioner in custody during the pendency of the trial. The counsel has placed reliance on a judgment of this Court in case reported as Chinder Vs. State of Punjab, 2008 (4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 512 .
However, keeping in view the fact that Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act would be applicable to the facts of the present case, the
CRM No. M-32214 of 2008 2
quantity of contraband being commercial in nature, I am of the considered view that the petitioner is not entitled to the concession of bail. The judgment relied upon by the counsel does not help the case of the petitioner as provisions of Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act have not been discussed in the same.
I, therefore, find no merit in this bail petition. The same is hereby dismissed.
(RAJAN GUPTA) JUDGE
March 16, 2009 'rajpal'
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail when the quantity of contraband is commercial in nature under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act.
Whether reliance on Chinder Vs. State of Punjab is applicable given the operation of Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Chinder Vs. State of PunjabDistinguished¶13
Chinder Vs. State of Punjab, 2008 (4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 512
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Paramjit Kaur
State of Punjab
RAJAN GUPTA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
