Allowed

Rajjinder Singh @ Raju v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC4 Nov 2020CRM-M/21263/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order grants anticipatory bail to two petitioners facing trial under Section 22 of the NDPS Act. Their bail had previously been cancelled due to absence from trial. The court accepted the petitions as the absence was a first default, conditional on regular appearance and adherence to trial court orders.

What did the court decide?

Interim directions issued earlier are made absolute granting anticipatory bail, subject to regular appearance before the trial court.

Rajjinder Singh @ Raju Vs State of Punjab — Narcotics (NDPS) | Punjab & Haryana HC (2020)

¶1

In The High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana At Chandigarh

¶2

(I) CRM-M-21263-2020 (O&M) Date of Decision:- 4.11.2020

¶3

Rajjinder Singh @ Raju … Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ... Respondent

¶4

(II) CRM-M-7593-2020 (O&M) Satnam Singh … Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ... Respondent

¶5

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL

¶6

Present:Mr. Siddharth Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner in CRM-M-21263-2020 .

¶7

Mr. Mohinder Kumar, Advocate, for the petitioner in CRM-M-7593-2020 .

¶8

Mr. Rana Harjasdeep Singh, DAG, Punjab.

¶9

(Proceedings conducted through video conferencing)

¶10

¶11

GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J . (Oral)

¶12

MOHAN SINGH 2020.11.05 09:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶13

CRM-M Nos. 21263 & 7593 of 2020 (O&M)

¶14

- 2 -

¶15

This order shall dispose of the above mentioned two petitions wherein petitioners Rajjinder Singh @ Raju and Satnam Singh, are seeking grant of anticipatory bail consequent upon cancellation of their bail by the trial Court vide order dated 28.11.2019.

¶16

The petitioners who have been facing trial in respect of FIR No. 249, dated 29.11.2017, Police Station Kartarpur, District Jalandhar (Rural), under Section 22 of NDPS Act, had been granted bail by the trial Court. However, on account of their absence on 28.11.2019, the trial Court cancelled their bail and issued ‘Non Bailable Warrants’ for securing their presence.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioners have submitted that their absence as on 28.11.2019 was on account of wrong impression about date and that otherwise they had always been appearing before the trial Court diligently. It has further been submitted that pursuant to interim directions issued by this Court, the petitioners have already appeared before the trial Court and furnished fresh bail bonds on 7.8.2020.

¶18

The aforestated position is not disputed by the learned State counsel especially since the counsel for the petitioners have today furnished a copy of order dated 7.8.2020 which is taken on record.

¶19

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the fact that the absence of the petitioners as on 28.11.2019 was the first instance of default on part of the petitioners, both the petitions are accepted and interim directions issued vide orders dated 31.7.2020 (in CRM-M-21263-2020) and 20.2.2020 (in CRM-M7593-2020) are made absolute subject to the condition that the

¶20

MOHAN SINGH 2020.11.05 09:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶21

CRM-M Nos. 21263 & 7593 of 2020 (O&M)

¶22

- 3 -

¶23

petitioners shall appear regularly before the trial Court and shall

¶24

abide by the conditions as may be imposed by the trial Court.

¶25

November 4, 2020

¶26

mohan

¶27

( GURVINDER SINGH GILL) JUDGE

¶28

Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No

¶29

MOHAN SINGH 2020.11.05 09:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Rajjinder Singh @ Raju v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajjinder Singh @ Raju 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

Amro @ Nikki Vs State of Punjab

Kanta Vs State of Haryana

Rajinder Prasad Tiwari Vs State of Punjab

Satnam Singh Vs State of Punjab

Kewal Singh and Anr. Vs State of Punjab

Gurmandeep Singh Vs State of Punjab