Single-judge oral order granting regular bail to the petitioners under Section 439 Cr.P.C in an NDPS case, citing the pendency of the trial and finding no useful purpose served by further detention.
Petitioners ordered to be enlarged on bail to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, Jalandhar/Trial Court.
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.
Crl.Misc. No. M-24088 of 2013 (O&M) -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Crl.Misc. No. M-24088 of 2013 (O&M) Date of decision : 13.09.2013
Mukesh Kumar @ Monu and another
....Petitioners
versus
State of Punjab
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI
Present: Mr. Bhirgu Dutt Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners
Mr. Gurveer Sidhu, AAG, Punjab
RITU BAHRI , J. (Oral)
This petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C is for grant of regular bail to the petitioners in case F.I.R No. 29 dated 19.02.2013 u/22/61/85 NDPS Act , registered at Police Station Maqsudan, Jalanhdar.
As per allegations in the F.I.R, the the recovery effected from the petitioners is 125 injections of Norgesic which falls under the NDPS Act and as per Sr. No. 169 in the notification dated 19.10.2001, 20 grams of beupenorphine is shown as commercial quantity and the small quantity is 1 gm. The total recovery of Buprenorphnine is 500 ml and as per calculation it comes to 1.4 gms which is marginally more than the small quantity.
Arora Gaurav 2013.09.28 11:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Crl.Misc. No. M-24088 of 2013 (O&M) -2-
Learned State counsel on instructions from Sub Inspector Pritam Singh has informed the Court that framing of the charges, the trial is at the stage of recording the prosecution evidence for 01.10.2013.
The petitioners are in custody since 19.02.2013. Nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner. They are not facing any other trial under the NDPS Act. Thus no useful purpose would be served by detaining them during the pendency of trial.
Heard.
Keeping in view the period of incarceration of the petitioners
and the fact that trial may still take some time to conclude, this court feels that there is no need to detain the petitioner any longer. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and petitioners are ordered to be enlarged on bail to
the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, Jalandhar/Trial Court.
13.09.2013 (RITU BAHRI) G.Arora JUDGE
Arora Gaurav 2013.09.28 11:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioners should be enlarged on regular bail given the stage of the trial and period of incarceration.
Whether detention of the petitioners serves any useful purpose at this stage of the proceedings.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Mukesh Kumar @ Monu and another
State of Punjab
Ritu Bahri J.
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
