Dismissed

Manzoor Masih v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC8 Jul 2024CRM-M/6995/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Fourth regular bail plea under Section 439 CrPC in an NDPS heroin recovery case where the petitioner had been in custody for over five years and the trial was nearly complete, only formal witnesses remaining. Bail was declined given the trial stage, but the trial court was directed to conclude the trial by 10.09.2024.

What did the court decide?

Bail declined; trial court directed to expedite and conclude trial by 10.09.2024.

Manzoor Masih Vs State of Punjab — Narcotics (NDPS) | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

225

¶3

CRM-M-6995-2024 Date of decision: July 8^th , 2024

Manzoor Masih

.....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

.....Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

¶10

Present: Mr. Ankur Jain, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶11

Mr. Amit Rana, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.

¶12

MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL)

¶13

This is a fourth petition filed by the petitioner seeking the concession of regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in case FIR No.66 dated 03.07.2019 under Section 21 of the NDPS Act, 1985, registered at Police Station Jhabai, District Tarn Taran.

¶14

Learned State counsel has disputed the submissions made by the counsel opposite that the trial has not concluded on the account of the non-appearance of the Investigation Officer before the trial Court to get his evidence recorded. Learned counsel has submitted that as per instructions, all the material witnesses including the Investigation Officer and the Gazetted Officer stand examined and now only four formal witnesses remain to be examined. It has been submitted that the next date fixed before the trial Court is 10.07.2024 when in all likelihood, the remaining witnesses would also be examined. Learned State counsel has, however, not disputed the PUNEET SACHDEVA custody period of the petitioner, who has now been in custody for more 2024.07.08 15:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶15

-2-

¶16

CRM-M-6995-2024

¶17

than five years having been arrested on 03.07.2019. Learned State counsel has, however, submitted that the petitioner is a man of criminal antecedents as he is involved in five other cases including two under the NDPS Act. It has also been submitted that a huge recovery of 500 grams of heroin was effected from the petitioner.

¶18

In the circumstances, keeping in view the stage of the trial, this Court is not inclined to extend the concession of bail to the petitioner.

¶19

The instant petition, therefore, stands dismissed.

¶20

However, this Court is conscious of the long custody period of the petitioner, hence, the trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude it positively on or before 10.09.2024.

¶21

July 8^th , 2024 ( MANJARI NEHRU KAUL ) Puneet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes Whether reportable : No

¶22

PUNEET SACHDEVA 2024.07.08 15:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

Manzoor Masih v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manzoor Masih 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

Sher Singh and Another Vs State of Punjab and Another

Balvinder @ Balvinder Singh Vs State of Haryana and Others

State of Haryana Vs Mahesh

Krishan Vs State of Haryana

Jasvir Singh Vs State of Punjab

Manjit Singh Alias Hazar Vs State of Punjab