Allowed

Dara Singh v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC1 Feb 2019CRM-M/50301/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in a case involving possession of poppy husk under NDPS Act. Court allowed bail despite petitioner's multiple prior cases, ordering release upon furnishing bonds.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner ordered to be released on bail during pendency of trial upon furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of Trial Court/Duty Magistrate.

Dara Singh Vs State of Haryana — Narcotics (NDPS) | Punjab & Haryana HC (2019)

¶1

-1-

¶2

CRM-M-50301 of 2018

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM-M-50301 of 2018 Date of Decision: 01.02.2019

Dara Singh

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana

....Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMENDRA JAIN

¶11

Present:Mr. Kuldeep V. Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Munish Sharma, AAG, Haryana.

¶12

RAMENDRA JAIN, J. (ORAL)

¶13

Through this petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. prayer has been made for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in a case arising from FIR No.227 dated 24.09.2018 registered under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 at Police Station Kalanwali, District Sirsa.

¶14

According to the prosecution, on 24.09.2018, petitioner was apprehended in conscious possession of 6 kgs of poppy husk.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that petitioner is innocent. He has falsely been implicated in the aforesaid FIR. No recovery has to be effected from him. Conclusion of trial may take a sufficient long time. No useful purpose would be served by detaining the petitioner in jail any more.

¶16

On the other hand, learned State counsel vehemently opposed

¶17

the bail to petitioner contending that petitioner was involved in 14 more

¶18

RAVINDER SINGH 2019.02.01 17:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

-2-

CRM-M-50301 of 2018

criminal cases.

Refuting the above submission of learned State counsel, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that in five cases, petitioner has been acquitted.

¶23

Considering overall facts and circumstances, but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the petition is allowed. Consequently, petitioner is ordered to be released on bail during pendency of trial, on his furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.

¶24

(RAMENDRA JAIN) February 01, 2019 JUDGE R.S. Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No

¶25

RAVINDER SINGH 2019.02.01 17:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

Dara Singh v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dara Singh 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prem Singh Vs State of Punjab through Director General of Police , Punjab, Chandigarh and Others

Kashmir Kaur Vs State of Punjab and Others

Bhupender Singh Vs State of Haryana

Baldev Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Naveen Vs State of Haryana

Mukesh Jangra Vs State of Haryana