Allowed

Sagar Kumar v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC6 Feb 2014CRM-M/3719/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana allowed the petitioner's bail application. The court held that excluding the weight of the glazed paper, the quantity of Diphenoxylate did not fall under 'Commercial Quantity', thereby permitting bail under statutory conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on regular bail with conditions including compliance with Cr.P.C. Section 437(3), prohibition on leaving the country, and powers to cancel bail on absence.

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

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

CRM-M-3719-2014 Date of Decision: 06.02.2014

Sagar Kumar

...... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

...... Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA

¶9

Present : Mr. I.S. Mann, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶10

Mr. Arshdeep Singh Kler, AAG, Punjab.

¶11

¶12

SURINDER GUPTA, J.(Oral)

¶13

Heard.

¶14

As per the prosecution, the petitioner was apprehended by the police on 30.03.2013 and 50 grams intoxicating powder, which later on was found to be Diphenoxylate, as per the report of the Chemical Examiner.

¶15

The petitioner applied for bail before the Sessions Judge, Sri Muktsar Sahib, which was declined on the ground that 50 grams of contraband recovered from the petitioner falls in commercial quantity, as per entry No. 44, in the table, specifying small quantity and commercial quantity of contraband as per notification S.O. 1055(E) dated 19.10.2001, issued under Section 2(viia) and (xxiiia) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'the Act').

¶16

Learned State counsel has not disputed that the contraband was weighed along with the glazed paper. By excluding the weight of glazed paper even by milligrams, the quantity of recovered contraband shall not fall in category of “Commercial Quantity”.

¶17

Satyawan 2014.02.10 16:53 "I attested to the accuracy and integrity of this document" High Court Chandigarh

¶18

CRM-M-3719-2014

¶19

¶20

The term “Commercial Quantity” has been defined under Section 2(viia) of the Act, as follows :-

¶21

“commercial quantity”, in relation to narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, means any quantity greater than the quantity specified by the Central Government by notification in the Official Gazette.”

¶22

As per entry No. 44 in the table referred above, the quantity of more than 50 grams of Diphenoxylate falls in “Commercial Quantity”.

¶23

Keeping in view all these facts and circumstances and without expressing any opinion on merits, the petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail bond and surety bond to the satisfaction of the trial Court/CJM, Sri Muktsar Sahib, subject to the following conditions :-

¶24

(i) He shall comply with the conditions mentioned in Section 437 (3) Cr.P.C.

¶25

(ii) In the event of his absence on any date of hearing, the benefit of bail allowed to the him shall stand withdrawn. The trial Court shall be competent to cancel his bail bond and surety bond and proceed to procure his presence in accordance with law. In that eventuality the applicant-appellant shall have to apply for bail afresh before the trial Court.

¶26

(iii) He shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the Court.

¶27

06.02.2014 ‘Satyawan’

¶28

( SURINDER GUPTA ) JUDGE

¶29

Satyawan 2014.02.10 16:53 "I attested to the accuracy and integrity of this document" High Court Chandigarh

Sagar Kumar v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sagar Kumar v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Om Pal Vs Ranjit Singh Andors

Isher Kaur Vs Jai Lal

Sohni & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Ravinder Vs State of Haryana

Gurnam Singh Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Ram Kali and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.