Allowed

Vikas @ Vicky v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC16 Jan 2023CRM-M/1141/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in an NDPS case involving 15.65 gm heroin recovery. The court held that since the investigation concluded, challan filed, and trial will delay, extending incarceration serves no useful purpose, and the non-commercial nature suggests rigour of non-bailable sections may not apply.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner ordered to be released on bail subject to furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds.

Vikas @ Vicky Vs State of Haryana — Narcotics (NDPS) | Punjab & Haryana HC (2023)

¶1

CRM-M-1141-2023

¶2

--1--

¶3

212 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM-M-1141-2023

¶5

Decided on:-16.01.2023

Vikas @ Vicky

....Petitioner..

vs.

State of Haryana

....Respondent.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA

¶12

Present: Mr. Ritesh Tomar, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶13

Mr. Sumit Jain, Additional Advocate General, Haryana, for the respondent-State.

¶14

¶15

HARKESH MANUJA J. (Oral)

¶16

Present petition has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking bail pending trial in case FIR No.526 dated 01.09.2022, under Section 21 (b) of NDPS Act, 1985, registered at Police Station Mujessar, Faridabad.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the present case recovery of alleged contraband was 15.65 gm of heroin/smack , which is non-commercial and, as such, rigour of Section 37 NDPS Act, does not apply. He further submits that the petitioner is behind the bars since 01.09.2022 i.e. more than 5½ months, the investigation already stands concluded, challan filed and the trial is likely to take some time, thus, no useful purpose is going to be served by keeping him in custody.

¶18

On the other hand, learned State counsel submits that the next date before the trial court is 17.01.2023 for framing of charges and opposes the prayer made in the present petition.

¶19

SONIKA 2023.01.16 16:54 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶20

CRM-M-1141-2023

¶21

--2--

¶22

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper book.

¶23

Considering the fact that the investigation already stands concluded, challan filed and trial is likely to take long time, besides the alleged recovery being non-commercial, no useful purpose is going to be served by extending the incarceration of the petitioner any further, who is in custody since 01.09.2022.

¶24

In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on the mertis of the case, the present petition is allowed. Petitioner, namely, Vikas @ Vicky is ordered to be released on bail, subject to his furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court/Duty

¶25

Magistrate.

¶26

16.01.2023 (HARKESH MANUJA) sonika JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/ No

¶27

SONIKA 2023.01.16 16:54 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

Vikas @ Vicky v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikas @ Vicky 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

Deepak Sharma @ Deepu Vs State of Punjab

Naranjan Dass Vs State of Punjab

Anjali Vs State of Haryana

Deepak Kumar and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Another

Amit Kumar Vs State of Haryana and Another

Bikramjit Singh Vs State of Punjab