JUDGMENT

Jasjit Singh Bedi, J. - The Prayer in this petition under Section 439 Cr.PC is for the grant of regular bail in case FIR No.280 dated 08.11.2020 under Sections 22, 25, 27-A and 29 of NDPS Act registered at Police Station City Sunam, District Sangrur.

2. The brief facts of the case are that when the police party was present at ITI Chowk, Sunam at about 10.05 pm a secret informer informed ASI Kashmir Singh that the petitioner-accused-Pankaj was habitual of selling intoxicating tablets and on that day also he had kept the tablets in his white colour Activa Scooter bearing number PB-07-BJ-4106 and was going to sell the same to his customers on the side of drain bridge situated at Bathinda road, Sunam and if a check post was set up he could be apprehended along with the intoxicating tablets and scooter. Since the information was said to be reliable, therefore, at 11.00 pm a ruqa was sent to the police station concerned i.e. P.S. City Sunam for registering the FIR against the petitioner. On the basis of ruqa the present FIR No. 280 dated 08.11.2020 under Sections 22, 25, 27-A and 29 of NDPS Act came to be registered against the accused petitioner at P.S. City, Sunam, Sangrur.

3. During the course of investigation the check post was installed and one person was seen coming from the side of the bridge riding on a Activa scooter bearing number PB-07-BJ-4106 on which a plastic bag was lying in front of the seat of the Activa Scooter. When he was signalled to stop with a Torch light by SI Darshan Singh, the rider of the scooter tried to take a U Turn but the scooter slipped and fell on the ground and after slipping the engine stopped. Due to the same the plastic bag lying on the scooter fell down and intoxicating tablets/strips came out. On being apprehended the petitioner disclosed his name as Pankaj, the present petitioner and 2000 strips, each strip containing 10 tablets i.e. 20,000 intoxicating tablets of Tramadol Hydrochloride labelled as Radol-100 was recovered.

4. During the interrogation, the petitioner disclosed that the intoxicating tablets were supplied to him by Surinder Singh @ Shelly son of Gurmeet Singh resident of Sunam and he supplied the same to Ramandeep Singh owner of Deep Medical Hall and Mehroj Kumar @ Uji. Based on the above said statement, the said persons were nominated as accused.

5. The Counsel for the petitioner firstly submits that the search and seizure is completely vitiated as Section 42 of the NDPS Act has been violated. No communication of the secret information received was sent to the superior officer within 72 hours and no reasons were recorded as to why warrants/authorization could not be obtained prior to conducting the raid/setting up of a naka after sunset. The police party was travelling in a private vehicle and the details of the ownership of the said private vehicle had not been mentioned anywhere in the police proceedings which was a clear cut violation of the policy framed by the government of Punjab regarding the use of private vehicles during the investigation of a criminal case. He further contended that the petitioner was a first time offender, in custody since 8.11.2020 and as none of the 23 prosecution witness had been examined, the delayed trial itself entitled him to the grant of bail more so when his co-accused had been granted the same concession.

6. The Counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the judgments in Rajender Singh Vs. State of Haryana Criminal Appeal No.1051 of 2009 Decided on 08.08.2011, Sukhdev Singh Vs. State of Haryana 2013(2) RCR (Criminal) 232, Darshan Singh Vs. State of Haryana 2016(1) RCR (Criminal) 333, State of Rajasthan Vs. Chhagan Lal 2014(4) RCR (Criminal) 559, State of Rajasthan Vs. Jag Raj Singh @ Hansa 2016(3) RCR (Criminal) 539, Boota Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Haryana 2021(2) RCR (Criminal) 892, Syed Yusuf Syed Noor Vs. State of Maharastra 2000(1) Crimes 193 to contend that there has been violation of Section 42 of the NDPS Act in the instant