Grant of bail to petitioner under Section 22 NDPS Act denied. Recovery of commercial quantities of drugs from petitioner established. No grounds for bail made out despite petitioner's claim of non-offensive supply role.
Prayer for regular bail dismissed; petitioner not entitled to 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.
Criminal Misc. No.M-25932 of 2014
[ 1 ]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Misc. No.M-25932 of 2014 Date of Decision: August 12, 2014
Charanjit Singh
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR SANGHI
Present: Mr.S.S.Rana, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr.R.S.Randhawa, Addl.AG, Punjab.
Naresh Kumar Sanghi, J.
Prayer in this petition is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, Charanjit Singh, who was booked for having committed the offence punishable under Section 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, in a case arising out of FIR No.51, dated 16.03.2013, registered at Police Station, Samrala, District Ludhiana.
Learned counsel contends that the petitioner was supplier of the manufactured drugs to the retail chemist and as such, he had not committed any offence.
Learned counsel for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner on the premise that there was no licence or permit with the petitioner to show that he was an authorized distributor of the manufactured drugs. He further submits that the commercial quantity of the prohibited drugs were recovered from the petitioner and as such, he is not entitled to bail.
Sharma Seema 2014.08.13 15:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
Criminal Misc. No.M-25932 of 2014
[ 2 ]
I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and with their able assistance gone through the material available on record.
According to the allegations 6500 tablets of Paravon spas, 11000 tablets of phenotil and 40 bottles each containing 100 ml rescof were recovered from the petitioner. The total weight of the tablets even if taken category wise would also attract the provisions of the commercial quantity.
No ground for grant of bail to the petitioner is made out. Dismissed.
August 12, 2014 (Naresh Kumar Sanghi) seema Judge
Sharma Seema 2014.08.13 15:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to a petitioner under Section 22 of the NDPS Act when commercial quantities of drugs were recovered from him despite his claim of being a supplier rather than an offende
Whether the absence of a distribution licence for the petitioner constitutes a ground to deny bail in an NDPS case involving commercial quantities.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Charanjit Singh
State of Punjab
NARESH KUMAR SANGHI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
