IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
H. S. Madaan, J.
Dilbagh Khan & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
State Of Punjab - Respondent
CRM-M-19936 of 2021 (O&M), CRM-M-29929 of 2019 (O&M), CRM-M-34436 of 2019 (O&M) and CRM-M-21427 of 2020 (O&M)
Decided On : 03-09-2021
NDPS Act - Drug Trafficking - Sections 15, 29, 37 - The court discussed the aim of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, to control and regulate drug trafficking and abuse. It highlighted the challenges in implementation, including political patronage, police involvement, and prosecution shortcomings. The court emphasized the importance of strict enforcement and the implications of granting bail, especially in cases involving commercial quantity. The judgment also addressed the admissibility of co-accused statements and the necessity of custodial interrogation for effective investigation.
Fact of the Case:
The accused were involved in drug trafficking and were seeking pre-arrest and regular bail. The court considered the aim of the NDPS Act, the facts of the case, and the accused's criminal records. It discussed the challenges in implementing the Act and the importance of strict enforcement to control drug trafficking and abuse.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the accused did not deserve bail due to the bar of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, their criminal records, and the necessity of custodial interrogation for effective investigation.
Issues: The issues included the admissibility of co-accused statements, the challenges in implementing the NDPS Act, and the necessity of strict enforcement and custodial interrogation for effective investigation.
Ratio Decidendi: The judgment emphasized the importance of strict enforcement of the NDPS Act, the admissibility of co-accused statements, and the necessity of custodial interrogation for effective investigation in drug trafficking cases.
Final Decision: All the petitions seeking pre-arrest and regular bail were dismissed by the court.
JUDGMENT
H. S. Madaan, J. - Case taken up through video conferencing.
1. Vide this order of mine, I intend to dispose of four petitions, bearing CRM-M-19936-2021, titled as 'Dilbagh Khan vs. State of Punjab, filed by petitioner - Dilbagh Khan, for grant of regular bail, whereas CRM-M-29929-2020, titled as 'Rajinder Kumar vs. State of Punjab', CRM-M-34436-2019, titled as 'Jaila Khan vs. State of Punjab'; CRM-M-21427-2020, titled as 'Satpal Dass @ Sattu vs. State of Punjab', filed by the petitioners - Rajinder Kumar, Jaila Khan and Satpal Dass @ Sattu, respectively, for grant of pre-arrest bail; all of them being accused in case FIR No. 93 dated 3.6.2019, for offences under Sections 15, 29 of NDPS Act, 1989 (Section 29 of the NDPS Act, added later on), registered at Police Station Sadar Sangrur, District Sangrur.
2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case, as per the prosecution story are that on 3.6.2019, a Police Party led by ASI Surinder Singh, while being present at Bus stand village Kheri, Police Station Sadar, Sangrur, received a secret information at about 6.10 P.M. that Dilbagh Khan s/o Bansai Khan r/o village Kheri, was in a habit of selling poppy husk in his car bearing registration No. PB-13-BB-4993, make Swift Dezire, by bringing it from outside and on that day also, he was to bring poppy husk in his car taking it to village Kheri. Finding the information to be reliable, ASI Surinder Singh sent a ruqqa to the Police Station, on the basis of which formal FIR was registered. Some more police personnel were summoned to the spot. A picket was laid on Link Road leading from Kularan to Kheri within the revenue limits of village Kheri. In the meanwhile, a Swift car, white in colour was spotted coming from the side of village Kular Khurd. It was intercepted and the person driving the car disclosed his name as Dilbagh Khan s/o Bansai Khan r/o village Kheri, P.S. Sadar, Sangrur. The car was searched as per rules, in the presence of DSP, Sub-division Sangrur, who had been summoned to the spot. The search of the car revealed that 4 plastic bags were being carried in the Dicky of the car and 2 plastic bags were there on the rear seat of the car. All the 6 bags were found to contain poppy husk. 4 plastic bags in the dicky were found to contain poppy husk weighing 30 kgs each, whereas the two bags placed on the rear seat of the car were found to contain 40 kgs each of poppy husk. The total recovery being 200 kgs of poppy husk. The recovered contraband was taken into possession and thereafter samples were drawn there from in the presence of JMIC. Dilbagh Khan - accused was arrested in this case. On return to the Police Station, the accused Dilbagh Khan was put in the lock up, where as the case property was deposited in the Malkhana.
3. Accused Dilbagh Khan was interrogated, during the course of which, he suffered a disclosure statement that at the time of elections, he had brought one quintal of poppy husk from Rajinder s/o Muni Ram r/o Ward No. 23, Indra Colony, Tohana (Haryana) and the poppy husk was supplied by him to Jaila Khan s/o Maghar Khan r/o Mirja Patti, Namol and Satpal Dass @ Sattu s/o Bhajan Dass r/o Maino Patti, Namol and the recovered poppy husk, was to be supplied to Jaila Khan and Satpal Dass @ Sattu. In that way Rajinder, Jaila Khan and Satpal Dass @ Sattu, were nominated in this case, on 6.6.2019. Offence under Section 29 of the NDPS Act, was added.
4. Thereafter, such persons, so nominated, namely, Rajinder Kumar, Jaila Khan and Satpal Dass @ Sattu - apprehending their arrest had approached the Court of Sessions at Sangrur, craving for grant of pre-arrest bail, but their prayer was rejected by the Court of Sessions at Sangrur. As such they have knocked at the door of this Court, praying for grant of similar relief, which request is being opposed by the State counsel.
5. Similarly, accused - Dilbgah Khan had approached the Court of Sessions at Sangrur, for grant of regular bail. However, his request same was declined by t
Dukhishyam Benupani, Asstt. Director
Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia etc. vs. The State of Punjab 1980 AIR(SC) 1632
Jayendra Saraswathi Swamigal vs. State of Tamil Nadu 2005 (1) RCR(Cri) 629
M.P. and another vs. Ram Kishna Balothia and another (1995) 3 SCC 221
Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre vs. State of Maharashtra and others 2011 (1) SCC 694
Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another 2020 (1) RCR(Cri) 833
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.