In this criminal miscellaneous petition regarding bail, a single-judge bench dismissed the application. The court noted the petitioner was apprehended with 60 Kgs. of poppy-husk and cited antecedents as the reason to deny bail. The plea to withdraw was also rejected.
Bail dismissed; prayer to withdraw the petition also declined.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Misc.-M No.30890 of 2012 (O&M) Date of Decision: November 06, 2012
Shinderpal Singh @ Shindu
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH
Present: Mr.Ravinder Sharma, Advocate, for Mr.Harchand Singh Batth, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr.Aman Bahri, Addl.A.G.Punjab, for the State.
RANJIT SINGH, J.
The petitioner was intercepted with two plastic bags, which were lying in the dickey of a car. On being intercepted, the petitioner was apprised that there is an apprehension of his being carrying some intoxicant material. On the search of the plastic bags done in the presence of a Gazetted Officer, 60 Kgs. of poppy-husk was recovered.
The prayer of the petitioner for bail was earlier declined and he has again filed this petition to seek bail. Notice was issued to ascertain the stage of trial. In response, State counsel informs the court that out of 12 witnesses, 2 have already been examined. The case is listed today for remaining prosecution evidence. Investigating Officer in this case has retired and this perhaps may be the reason for bit delay in this case. State counsel also points out
Criminal Misc.-M No.30890 of 2012 (O&M) :2:
that there are six other FIRs against the petitioner, out of which two are under the NDPS Act. The counsel for the petitioner, however, pleads that petitioner has been falsely implicated. That would be a defence, which the petitioner would raise before the trial court.
In view of the antecedents of the petitioner, no case for his release on bail is made out.
Dismissed.
At this stage, counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this petition. That prayer is also declined.
November 06, 2012 ( RANJIT SINGH ) ramesh JUDGE
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is eligible for bail in a trial for narcotics offense.
Whether the petitioner can withdraw his bail petition.
Shinderpal Singh @ Shindu
State of Punjab
Ranjit Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
