Allowed

Pargat Singh v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC26 Sept 2024CRM-M/38931/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail sought in NDPS case involving 2 kg 500 grams codeine, a commercial quantity. Petitioner, a previous NDPS convict whose appeal is pending with suspended sentence, had been in custody over two years and two months. Court balanced Section 37 NDPS rigours against Article 21 speedy-trial rights and admitted him to bail.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner admitted to regular bail on furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to satisfaction of trial Court/Duty Magistrate on usual terms and conditions.

Pargat Singh Vs State of Punjab — Narcotics (NDPS) | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

S. No.216

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

********

¶4

CRM-M-38931 of 2024 Date of Decision:26.09.2024 Pargat Singh .....Pe--oner Vs. State of Punjab .....Respondent

¶5

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA

¶6

Present:Mr. L.S. Sekhon, Advocate for the pe��oner.

¶7

Mr. Rajiv K. Takkar, DAG, Punjab. ****

¶8

DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (Oral)

¶9

Status report by way of affidavit of Shri Sanjeev Goyal, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, STF, Pa�ala Range, Pa�ala filed on behalf of the respondentState along with custody cer�ficate have been placed on record.

¶10

By way of present pe��on filed under Sec�on 439 Cr.P.C., pe��oner prays for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.138 dated 26.06.2022 registered under Sec�ons 22, 27 and 31 of the Narco�c Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, `the NDPS Act’) at Police Sta�on STF Phase IV, SAS Nagar (Mohali), District SAS Nagar (Mohali).

¶11

This is second pe��on. The earlier pe��on bearing CRM-M-5405 of 2024 was dismissed as withdrawn by this Court vide order dated 08.05.2024 (Annexure P.5).

¶12

As per prosecu�on allega�ons, on the basis of secret informa�on, pe��oner was apprehended on 26.06.2022 and 25 vials of Chlorpheniramine Maleate and Codeine Phosphate were recovered from him. On analysis, the salt was found to

¶13

RENU 2024.09.26 17:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶14

CRM-M-38931 of 2024 -2-

¶15

that of Codeine with total weight of 2 kg 500 grams, which falls in the commercial category as the threshold starts from 1 kg.

¶16

Learned counsel for the pe��oner contends that the pe��oner is in custody for the last more than 02 years and 02 months and that trial is likely to take long �me to conclude and so he be allowed bail.

¶17

Learned State Counsel has strongly opposed the bail pe��on by poin�ng out that the pe��oner is a previous convict inasmuch as he is convicted in case FIR No.62 dated 18.04.2013 under Sec�on 22 of the NDPS Act and was sentenced to undergo RI for a period of 10 years and fine of �1 lakh vide judgment dated 19.08.2015 and that his sentence was suspended in that case on 02.06.2017 and aAer coming out of jail, he commiBed the said offence in June, 2022. Learned counsel also points out that recovered category falls in commercial category.

¶18

No doubt that the pe��oner is a previous convict but his appeal has since been admiBed and his sentence was suspended. As far as the present case is concerned, his custody period is 02 years 02 months and 27 days as per the custody cer�ficate. Learned State Counsel also informs that out of 16 witnesses cited by the prosecu�on, 3 have been examined, 5 have been given up and 8 are s�ll leA to be examined. Thus trial is likely to take long �me to conclude.

¶19

Having regard to long incarcera�on of the pe��oner in custody, the rigours of Sec�on 37 of the NDPS Act are required to be balanced with Ar�cle 21 of the

¶20

RENU 2024.09.26 17:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶21

CRM-M-38931 of 2024 -3-

¶22

Cons�tu�on of India guaranteeing Fundamental Right to life and liberty of which speedy trial is a facet.

¶23

Considering the afore-said facts and circumstances of the case, but without commen�ng anything on the merits of the case, the present pe��on is allowed. Pe��oner is admiBed to bail on his furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the sa�sfac�on of learned trial Court/ Duty Magistrate concerned, on usual terms and condi�ons.

¶24

September 26, 2024		( DEEPAK GUPTA )
renu		JUDGE
Whether Speaking/reasoned	Yes/No
Whether Reportable	Yes/No

¶25

RENU 2024.09.26 17:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

Pargat Singh v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pargat Singh 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

Sukhdev Singh Vs Mukhtiar Kaur

Amit Kumar Bhardwaj Vs State of Haryana

Vijay Kumar Korpal Vs Ram Kumar Sharma and Others

Dharminder Singh Vs State of Punjab

Rulia Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab and Others

Monu Saini @ Dalip Vs State of Haryana