Allowed

Parmjit @ Parmla and Anr. v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC9 Sept 2016CRM-M/10728/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the bail petition of two female petitioners detained under the NDPS Act. After detaining them for over 10 months following receipt of laboratory reports, the Court fixed their bail pending trial.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; petitioners ordered to be released on bail by furnishing surety bonds to the trial court subject to a condition not to indulge in activities similar to the accused one during the tri

Parmjit @ Parmla and Anr. Vs State of Punjab — Narcotics (NDPS) | Punjab & Haryana HC (2016)

¶1

Cr. Misc. M 10728 of 2016

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶4

Cr. Misc. M 10728 of 2016 Date of decision: 9.9.2016

¶5

Parmjit @ Parmla and anr

Petitioners

vs.

State of Punjab

Respondent

Present: Mr. BS Kathuria, Advocate. Mr. Jashanpreet Singh, AAG, Punjab

¶11

M.M.S.BEDI,J.

¶12

The petitioners are ladies, who were allegedly found in possession of about 250 grams and 260 grams of intoxicating powder respectively on 25.5.2015. They had been granted the concession of interim bail in order to await the report of Forensic Science Laboratory. After report having been received, they are in custody since 17.3.2016. Total period of detention suffered by the petitioners is about 10 months.

¶13

During the course of arguments, it transpires that Dev, who is described as husband of both the petitioners, is involved in a number of cases under the NDPS Act. So far as the petitioners are concerned, it is a fact that another FIR has been registered against petitioner No.1 and her husband on the allegation that petitioner No.1 had snatched a revolver of one of the police officials, at the instance of ASI Surinder Singh at P.S. Mukundpur.

¶14

Without expression of any opinion regarding vindictiveness of the local police against petitioner No1 and taking into consideration the period of detention suffered by the petitioners, the petitioners can be Tapinder Singh Manngranted the concession of bail. 2016.09.09 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶15

Cr. Misc. M 10728 of 2016

¶16

¶17

The petition is allowed. The petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on their furnishing bail bonds/ surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial court subject to a condition that the petitioners will not indulge in similar activity, of which they are accused of, during pendency of the trial. In case of any such eventuality, it will be open to the prosecution agency to seek cancellation of bail.

¶18

Nothing said in this order will prejudice the right of the prosecution or the petitioners, during trial.

¶19

September 9 ,2016 ( M.M.S.BEDI ) TSM JUDGE Whether speaking/ reasoned Yes/ No Whether Reportable Yes/ No

¶20

Tapinder Singh Mann 2016.09.09 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Parmjit @ Parmla and Anr. v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parmjit @ Parmla and Anr. 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ajayver Singh @ Goga Vs State of Punjab

Satnam Kaur Vs State of Punjab

Jagbir Rana Vs State of Haryana

Suresh Vs State of Haryana

Kulwant Singh Vs State of Punjab

Ramesh Vs State of Haryana