Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
AVNEESH JHINGAN, J.
Manish Kumar @ Makhan - Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent
CRM-M-19040 of 2021
Decided On : 18-05-2021
Anticipatory Bail - NDPS Act - The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner under Section 15 of the NDPS Act, 1985, considering the non-commercial quantity of the recovered substance and the absence of recovery from the petitioner's conscious possession.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought anticipatory bail in a case under Section 15 of the NDPS Act, 1985, where he was nominated based on secret information and 5 kilograms of poppy husk were recovered from his residence.
Finding of the Court:
The court granted pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, subject to investigation within two weeks, and directed him to join the investigation when called for, and abide by the conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
Issues: The main issue was the petitioner's involvement in the case based on the recovery of the substance from his residence and the necessity of custodial interrogation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the non-commercial quantity of the recovered substance, the absence of recovery from the petitioner, and the fact that the co-accused had already been granted bail in reaching its decision to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Final Decision: The petition for anticipatory bail was allowed, and the petitioner was granted pre-arrest bail subject to certain conditions.
JUDGMENT :
AVNEESH JHINGAN, J.
1. The matter is taken up for hearing through video conference due to COVID-19 situation.
2. This is a petition for anticipatory bail in FIR No. 103 dated 13.4.2021, under Section 15 of the NDPS Act, 1985, registered at Police Station Patran, District Patiala.
3. A secret information was received that Manish Kumar and his wife Priyanka were indulging in sale of intoxicant substances. Acting on the information, on 13.4.2021 the police raided their residence. Manish Kumar was not available. Priyanka was present and 5 kilograms of poppy husk stored in a plastic bag was recovered from the house. During investigation, Manish Kumar (petitioner) was nominated in the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there was no recovery from the conscious possession of the petitioner; he was nominated on the basis of secret information received. The recovery made is of 5 kilograms of poppy husk i.e. non-commercial.
5. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail. She submits that the police acted on the basis of secret information and resultantly recovered five kilograms of poppy husk, hence custodial interrogation is necessary.
6. The recovery of poppy husk is of non-commercial quantity and the petitioner was not present at the time when the house was raided. No recovery was effected from the petitioner. Co-accused- Priyanka has already been granted bail. The petitioner is not involved in any other case under the NDPS Act.
7. Considering the nature of allegations and the recovery made, the petitioner is granted pre-arrest bail subject to his investigation within two weeks. In the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail subject to his furnishing adequate bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer. He is directed to join the investigation as and when called for. He shall abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
8. The petition is allowed.
9. In case of failure of the petitioner to join the investigation, the State would be at liberty to file an application for re-calling of this order.
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
