Allowed

Harmeet Singh @ Nikka v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC24 Jun 2021CRM-M/22515/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought bail in a NDPS case involving recovery of Tramadol tablets. The court, noting the lengthy custody and lack of prior cases against the petitioner, allowed the bail petition without observing on merits.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on furnishing bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate.

Harmeet Singh @ Nikka Vs State of Punjab — Narcotics (NDPS) | Punjab & Haryana HC (2021)

¶1

CRM-M-22515-2021

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

¶5

CRM-M-22515-2021

¶6

Date of Decision: 24.06.2021

¶7

Harmeet Singh @ Nikka

....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

.....Respondent

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL

¶13

Present : Mr. Gurvinder Singh Aulakh, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶14

Mr. Avtar Singh Sandhu, Additional Advocate General, Punjab.

¶15

HARNARESH SINGH GILL, J. (Oral)

¶16

Case is taken up for hearing through video conferencing.

¶17

Through this petition, the petitioner seeks regular bail in case bearing FIR No.295 dated 12.11.2020, registered at Police Station Gidderbaha, District Shri Muktsar Sahib, under Section 22(b) of the NDPS Act, 1985 and Section 29 of the NDPS Act added later on vide DDR No.053 dated 13.11.2020.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the co-accused Jaskaran Singh @ Babbu and Sukhpreet Singh @ Preet were in possession of 730 tablets of Tramadol Hydrochloride measuring 254 grams. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contends that the petitioner is in custody for the last 07 months and 07 days and there is no case registered or pending against the petitioner under the NDPS Act.

¶19

Notice of motion.

¶20

On the asking of this Court, Mr. Avtar Singh Sandhu,

¶21

VIRENDRA SINGH ADHIKARI 2021.06.24 14:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶22

CRM-M-22515-2021

¶23

-2-

¶24

Additional Advocate General, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State

¶25

Learned State counsel states that the recovery effected from the petitioner is marginally above the commercial quantity and the petitioner has undergone 07 months and 07 days and no other case has been registered against the petitioner under the NDPS Act.

¶26

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶27

Though the case is at the stage of evidence, yet the trial will

¶28

take time to conclude especially due to prevailing situation of Covid-19.

¶29

In view of the above, without commenting anything on the merits, lest it should prejudice the case of either side, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate.

¶30

	(HARNA	RESH SINGH GILL)
24.06.2021		JUDGE
adhikari
	Whether speaking/non-speaking	: Yes/No
	Whether reportable	: Yes/No

¶31

VIRENDRA SINGH ADHIKARI 2021.06.24 14:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Harmeet Singh @ Nikka v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harmeet Singh @ Nikka 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

Vitus @ Sbbe Victor Iffiani Andusfai Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Karamjit Singh Vs State of Punjab and Others

Priya Bhatia Vs State of Haryana and Another

Gursahib Singh @ Pargat Singh @ Shabba Vs State of Punjab

Alka Rani and Anr. Vs State of U.T. and Anr.

Gurmeet Singh Vs State of Punjab