Allowed

Sachin v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC26 Sept 2014CRM-M/18730/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed bail petitions for two accused booked under Sections 21B and 22(c) of the NDPS Act. Finding no need for further detention after the trial period commenced, the court ordered their release on bail subject to furnishing bonds, referencing earlier Supreme Court precedents.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners ordered to be released on bail during the pendency of the trial, subject to furnishing bail bonds.

Sachin Vs State of Haryana — Narcotics (NDPS) | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

Crl. Misc. No. M-18730 of 2014 (O&M) -1-

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

Crl. Misc. No. M-18730 of 2014 (O&M)

¶4

Sachin ....Petitioner

¶5

versus

¶6

State of Haryana ...Respondent

¶7

Crl. Misc. No. M-26377 of 2014 (O&M)

¶8

Naresh Kumar ....Petitioner

versus

State of Haryana

...Respondent

Date of decision : 11.09.2014

¶13

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI

¶14

Present: Mr. R.S. Rai, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. Gautam Dutt, Advocate for the petitioner in CRM-M-18730 of 2014

¶15

Mr. Munish Mittal, Advocate for the petitioner in CRM-M-26377 of 2014

¶16

Ms. Kirti Singh, DAG, Haryana

¶17

¶18

RITU BAHRI , J.

¶19

This order shall dispose of the above two petitions i.e CRM-M-18730 and 26377 of 2014 wherein prayer is for grant of regular bail to the petitioners, who have been booked for having committed the offence punishable under Sections 21B, 22(c ) of NDPS Act, 1985 registered at Police Station City Mandi Dabwali, Distt. Sirsa.

¶20

On 15.03.2014, a police party headed by ESI Sube Singh was present near Water-Works Baba Mansa Gass, GT

¶21

GAURAV 2014.10.06 15:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶22

Crl. Misc. No. M-18730 of 2014 (O&M) -2-

¶23

Road, Dabwali and said police party was making checking of vehicles due to Elections. One Indica car bearing No. HR-01-AF3007 was intercepted by the police and the driver of the vehicle disclosed his name as Sachin and other person disclosed his name as Naresh Kumar. On checking of car, it was found three boxes and two plastic bags were being carried in the vehicle and when questioned, occupants of the car disclosed that Rexcof bottles were in the said boxes. An information was sent to Drug Inspector through SDM and Rajnish Daniwal, Drug Inspector reached at the spot and three box and plastic bags were searched and it was found that 900 rexcof bottles and 900 strips of tablet lomotil, each strip containing 60 tablet i.e total 54000 tablets lomotil were packed in the boxes/plastic bags. The report of the Drug Inspector reads as under:-

¶24

“As per application the codeine phsphate IP is found 180.80 gm which Narcotic Drug, which is less than commercial quantity but more than small quantity and falls and punishable under Section 21 (b) of NDPS Act, and Diphenoxlyate Hydrochloride IPC on calculation is found 135.00 gm which is psychotropic substance, is more than commercial quantity, which is punishable under Section 22(c) of NDPS Act, 1985.”

¶25

The petitioners were thereafter arrested for commission of offence punishable u/ss 21(b) of NDPS Act.

¶26

Sachin is having licence of wholesale Drugs issued under Drugs and Cosmetic Rules, 1945, which was valid for the

¶27

GAURAV

¶28

2014.10.06 15:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶29

Crl. Misc. No. M-18730 of 2014 (O&M) -3-

¶30

period 11.07.2011 to 13.07.2016 in favour of Baba Pharmacy near Puli Ward No. 10 Panipat. However, the petitioners were not able to produce the bills to justify origin and destination of contraband in question. The bail of the petitioners was declined on 23.04.2014 (P3 in CRM-M-18730 of 2014) and the second bail application of Naresh was also dismissed again on 24.06.2014 (P-2 in CRM-M-26377 of 2014).

¶31

Learned counsel for the petitioners have referred to judgment passed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in a case of Parmanand v. State of Haryana, 2014(1) R.C.R (Crl) 437 whereby large number of allopathic drugs containing narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances recovered from accused, who did not possess any licence. The accused was granted bail on the ground that State Government has not framed any rule thereof under NDPS that any licence is required for storage of allopathic drugs containing Narcotic Drugs.

¶32

The judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Parmanand 's case (supra) has been followed by this Court in Ashwani Kumar vs. State of Punjab, 2014(1) R.C.R (Crl) 715 while granting bail to the accused

¶33

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and with their able assistance gone through the material available on record.

¶34

The petitioners are in custody since 15.03.2014 and no recoveries are to be effected from them.

¶35

Keeping in view the period of incarceration of the

¶36

GAURAV 2014.10.06 15:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶37

Crl. Misc. No. M-18730 of 2014 (O&M) -4-

¶38

petitioners and the fact that trial may still take some time to conclude, this court feels that there is no need to detain the petitioners any longer, Accordingly, the present petitions are allowed. Petitioners Sachin and Naresh Kumar, are ordered to be released on bail during pendency of the trial of the present case, subject to their furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, Sirsa.

¶39

26.09.2014 G Arora

¶40

(RITU BAHRI) JUDGE

¶41

GAURAV 2014.10.06 15:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Sachin v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sachin v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kuldeep Singh Vs State of Haryana & Anr.

Nirmal Singh Vs State of Punjab

Malti Devi and Anr. Vs Ut of Chandigarh and Ors.

Ranjit Kumar & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Anr.

Gian Chand Vs State of Haryana

Sarabjit Singh Vs State of Punjab