Allowed

Narinder Kumar @ Nindi v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC16 Sept 2021CRM-M/1611/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge order granting regular bail to the petitioner in a narcotics case involving heroin possession. The court accepted the plea due to the petitioner's prolonged detention, clean record, and the delay in trial conclusion.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner ordered to be released on regular bail subject to furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the trial court or concerned magistrate.

Narinder Kumar @ Nindi Vs State of Punjab — Narcotics (NDPS) | Punjab & Haryana HC (2021)

¶1

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

¶2

CRM-M-1611-2020 (O&M) Date of Decision:-16.9.2021

¶3

Narinder Kumar @ Nindi … Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

... Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL

¶8

Present:Mr. Yashpal Thakur, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶9

Mr. Ajay Pal Singh Gill, DAG, Punjab, assisted by ASI Rajinder Pal.

¶10

¶11

GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J .(Oral)

¶12

The petitioner seeks grant of regular bail in respect of a case registered vide FIR No.366 dated 25.7.2018 at Police Station Focal Point, District Ludhiana under Section 22 of Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, wherein offences under Sections 27-A and 29 of NDPS Act were added later on.

¶13

As per the case of prosecution, the petitioner Narinder Kumar @ Nindi alongwith Yogesh was apprehended by the police. While the petitioner was found in possession of 335 grams of ‘ heroin ’,which he was carrying in a polythene bag, the co-accused Yogesh was found in possession of 265 grams of ‘ heroin ’, which he was carrying in a separate polythene bag.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the instant case a joint offer in terms of Section 50 of NDPS Act was extended to the accused,

¶15

PANKAJ KAKKAR 2021.09.16 16:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶16

( 2 ) CRM-M-1611-2020 (O&M)

¶17

which cannot be said to be a valid offer. It has further been submitted that the petitioner, in any case, cannot be attributed conscious possession of the contraband being carried by co-accused. Learned counsel has submitted that since the petitioner has been behind bars since the last more than 3 years and has a clean record, he deserves the concession of bail.

¶18

Opposing the petition, learned State counsel has submitted that even if the recovery in respect of co-accused is ignored, still the quantity of contraband recovered from the petitioner, which is 335 grams of ‘ heroin ’, would qualify to be termed as ‘commercial’ quantity and that in these circumstances the petitioner is disentitled for grant of bail. Learned State counsel has, however, informed that the petitioner has been behind bars since the last more than 3 years and that he is not involved in any other case registered under NDPS Act. It has also been informed that as on date only 5 out of the cited 27 PWs have been examined and that another 2 have been given up.

¶19

I have considered rival submissions addressed before this Court.

¶20

Without commenting as regards merits of the case but while noticing that the petitioner has been behind bars for a substantial period of more than 3 years and has a clean record and that conclusion of trial is likely to consume time as only 5 out of the cited 27 PWs have been examined so far, further detention will not serve any useful purpose. The petition, as such, is accepted and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned.

¶21

16.9.2021

¶22

pankaj Whether speaking /reasoned Whether Reportable

¶23

Yes / No Yes / No

¶24

( Gurvinder Singh Gill ) Judge

¶25

PANKAJ KAKKAR 2021.09.16 16:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Narinder Kumar @ Nindi v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narinder Kumar @ Nindi 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

Amit Kumar @ Amit Vs State of Haryana

Mahender Singh and Another Vs State of Haryana

Kuldeep and Others Vs State of Haryana

Mangal Singh Vs State of Punjab

Abdul Kayyum Vs State of Haryana

Harmanjeet Singh Vs State of Punjab