Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Avneesh Jhingan, J.
Gagandeep - Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab - Respondent
CRM-M-3055-2021
Decided On : 27-01-2021
Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Regular Bail - Recovery of Tramadol Tablets
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner was found in conscious possession of 650 tablets of Tramadol during a police check. The petitioner filed a petition for regular bail, claiming false implication and lack of involvement in any other case.
Finding of the Court:
The court considered the marginally higher recovery from the petitioner's possession compared to the commercial quantity, the presentation of challan without framed charges, the time expected for trial conclusion, and the completion of investigation. The court allowed the petition and ordered the petitioner's release on regular bail, subject to furnishing surety/bail bonds.
Issues: The main issue was the petitioner's involvement in the possession of Tramadol tablets and the consideration of bail based on the quantity of recovery and other case involvements.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the marginally higher recovery from the petitioner's possession compared to the commercial quantity, the stage of trial proceedings, and the absence of pending NDPS cases against the petitioner.
Final Decision: The petition for regular bail was allowed, and the petitioner was ordered to be released on regular bail upon furnishing surety/bail bonds.
JUDGMENT
Avneesh Jhingan, J (Oral) - The matter is taken up for hearing through video conference due to COVID-19 situation.
2. This is a petition for regular bail in case arising from FIR No. 56, dated 31st May, 2020, under Section 22 of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 registered at Police Station Kot Ise Khan.
3. On the basis of a secret information on 31st May, 2020 car bearing registration No. PB-04-AA-7094 was checked. Including driver there were three occupants of the car and one of them was petitioner. 650 tablets of Tramadol were recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. There were recovery made from the conscious possession of other co-accused also.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and is not involved in any other case. He further submits that challan was presented but charges have not been framed yet.
5. Learned State counsel opposes the prayer for bail and submits that there were three accused and 650 tablets of Tramadol were recovered from the petitioner; 700 tablets were recovered from Jeet Singh and 300 tablets were recovered from Money. The contention is that the total recovery is much more.
6. Considering the facts; that recovery from the conscious possession of the petitioner is marginally higher than the commercial; challan has been presented; conclusion of trial will take time; investigation is complete and no recovery is to be made; there is no other case of NDPS is pending against the petitioner, the present petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail subject to his furnishing surety/bail bonds to the satisfaction of learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate.
7. However, it is clarified that anything stated hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case and is only for the purpose of deciding the bail application.
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
