Back
PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
Naresh Kumar Sanghi, J.
Sonu - Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana - Respondent
Criminal Misc. No. M-35503 of 2013
Decided On : 31-01-2014
Bail - Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - The court granted regular bail to the petitioner who was booked for an offence under Section 20 of the NDPS Act, 1985, based on the recovery of non-commercial quantity of charas. The prosecution had not been able to lead its evidence and the petitioner was found to be neither required nor involved in any other case.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner was booked for an offence under Section 20 of the NDPS Act, 1985, based on the recovery of non-commercial quantity of charas. The petitioner had been in incarceration since 15.07.2013.
Finding of the Court:
The court, after considering the totality of the facts and circumstances, allowed the petition and ordered the release of the petitioner on bail during the pendency of the trial.
Issues: Grant of regular bail to the petitioner who was booked for an offence under Section 20 of the NDPS Act, 1985, based on the recovery of non-commercial quantity of charas.
Ratio Decidendi: The recovery of non-commercial quantity of charas, the lack of evidence led by the prosecution, and the petitioner not being required nor involved in any other case influenced the court's decision to grant bail.
Final Decision: The petitioner was ordered to be released on bail during the pendency of the trial of the present case.
Prayer in this petition is for grant of regular bail to petitioner Sonu who has been booked for having committed the offence punishable under Section 20 the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, in a case arising out of FIR No.794, dated 15.07.2013, registered at Police Station, City, Panipat.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that noncommercial quantity of 200 grams of charas was allegedly recovered from the petitioner on 15.07.2013 and since then, he is behind the bars. He further contends that he is neither required nor involved in any other case. He also contends that in spite of such a long incarceration of the petitioner, the prosecution has not been able to lead its evidence.
3. Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Ramesh Chand, Police Station, City, Panipat, very fairly concedes that the alleged contraband recovered from the petitioner is of non commercial quantity and he is behind the bars from 15.07.2013. He further concedes that the petitioner is neither required nor involved in any other case.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the material available on record.
5. Keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, the present petition is allowed. Petitioner- Sonu son of Pritam, r/o Jangra Market, Kutani Road, Panipat, is ordered to be released on bail during the pendency of the trial of the present case subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, Panipat.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
