Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
M.S. Ramachandra Rao,Sureshwar Thakur, JJ.
Bikram Singh Majithia – Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab – Respondent
CRM-M-21391-2022
Decided On : 10-08-2022
NDPS Act - Regular Bail - Sec.25,27A,29 - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed the application for regular bail under Sec.439 Cr.P.C in a case registered under Sec.25,27A and 29 of the Narcotics and Psychotropic Substances Act,1985. The court analyzed the allegations against the petitioner, the legal provisions under the NDPS Act, and the principles governing grant of regular bail.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a politician, sought regular bail in a case registered under the NDPS Act. The State alleged his involvement in drug trafficking and financing illegal drug trade. The petitioner challenged the allegations, claiming political vendetta and malafide intent. The court considered the scope of the bail application and the legality of the FIR registration.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the evidence against the petitioner was frail and not credible. It concluded that reasonable grounds existed to believe that the petitioner was not guilty of financing drug trafficking or harboring offenders. The court also emphasized that bail is the rule and refusal is the exception, and that deprivation of liberty before conviction has a substantial punitive content.
Issues: The issues involved the legality of the FIR registration, the credibility of the evidence against the petitioner, and the application of the principles governing grant of regular bail under the NDPS Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the finding that the evidence against the petitioner was not credible and that reasonable grounds existed to believe that the petitioner was not guilty of the alleged offences. The court also emphasized the principle that bail is the rule and refusal is the exception, and that imprisonment before conviction has a substantial punitive content.
Final Decision: The court allowed the petitioner's application for regular bail, directing his release on certain conditions. The court emphasized that the observations made were only for the purpose of adjudicating the bail application and should not be construed as a final expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
JUDGMENT
M.S. Ramachandra Rao, J. - This is an application filed by petitioner seeking regular bail under Sec.439 Cr.P.C in case FIR No.0002 dt.20.12.2021 registered under Sec.25,27A and 29 of the Narcotics and Psychotropic Substances Act,1985 (for short 'the NDPS Act'), Police Station Punjab State Crime, SAS Nagar, Mohali.
2. The background facts The petitioner is a politician and a senior member of the Akali Dal political party. He was a Member of the Punjab State Legislative Assembly closely related to a former Deputy Chief Minister of the State and also to a Member of Parliament.
3. In 2013, four FIRs were registered under the NDPS Act. They are:
S.No. | FIR No. | Date | Under Sections | Police Station |
1. | 45 | 3.3.2013 | Sections 420,467,468,471 IPC, and Sections 21,61 of NDPS Act and Sections 25,54 and 59 of Arms Act. | Fatehgarh Sahib |
2. | 69 | 8.3.2013 | Sections 21,22,61 of NDPS Act and Section 13 of FEMA | Gobindgarh |
3. | 69 | 16.4.2013 | Sections 420,467,468,471 IPC, and Sections 21,22,61 of NDPS Act | Fatehgarh Sahib |
4. | 56 | 15.5.2013 | 379,411,473,120-B IPC and Sections 21,22,61 of NDPS Act | Banur |
4. On the basis of the same, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) registered an ECIR No.ECIR JLZO/02/2013 dt.25.3.2013 against Jagdish Singh @ Bhola, Anup Singh Kahlon and others. During the course of investigation of the ECIR, the ED recorded in 2014-15 statements of Jagdish Singh @ Bhola, Maninder Singh @ Bittu Aulakh, Jagjit Singh Chahal among others.
5. In 2013, based on a letter by Sh.Shashikant, this Court registered CWP No.20359 of 2013 titled Own motion vs. State of Punjab and others, a PIL to check drug menace in the State of Punjab.
6. By that time, a Special Investigation Team (SIT) under the supervision of the Senior Superintendent of Police, Patiala was conducting investigation in the FIRs registered against Jagjit Singh Chahal, Maninder Singh @ Bittu Aulakh, Jagdish Singh@ Bhola and others and related FIRs.
7. Alleging unfairness of investigation by the SIT, Jagjit Singh Chahal filed CWP NO.88/2014, Maninder Singh @ Bittu Aulakh filed CRM-M-32827/2014 and Balchinder Singh, father of Jagdish Singh @ Bhola filed CWP No.342 of 2014 in this Court. They wanted transfer of investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation.
8. These cases along with similar cases filed by others were decided by a Division Bench of this Court on 7.10.2015. The High Court rejected the prayer for transfer of investigation /investigation by the CBI. It constituted a Supervisory Investigation Team of three senior IPS Officers to further/reinvestigate the matter. All the investigating officers were directed to hand over all the case files to this Supervisory Investigation Team and identify missing links, lack of proof or the evidence which could be credible, but has not been collected or made part of the record for some obvious reasons.
9. Thereafter 10 more supplementary challans were filed under Sec.173(8) Cr.P.C.
10. But the petitioner was not arrayed as an accused in any of the above cases by the investigative agencies.
11. In the meantime, in CWP NO.20359 of 2013 , the PIL pending before this Court, an application was filed by an intervenor 'Lawyers for Human Rights International' to investigate the matter on the basis of the statements of Jagjit Singh Chahal, Jagdish Singh@ Bhola and Maninder Singh@ Bittu Aulakh in relation to the complicity of the petitioner with the drug mafia.
12. A Special Task Force (for short 'STF') had been appointed by the then State Government in 2017 to deal with the drug menace in the State. It was headed by Sri Harpreet Singh Sidhu, IPS, ADGP, Punjab.
13. On 28.11.2017, this Court directed him to enquire into the allegations mentioned in the application and file a status report.
14. He was directed by this Court to file a status report on 31.1.2018 in CWP.No.20359-2013.
15. In his status report, Sri Harpreet Singh Sidhu, IPS (Head of the STF) referred to certain statements made under Sec.50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act,2002 by
(i) Jagdish Singh@ Bhola (accused
The main legal point established in the judgment is that bail is the rule and refusal is the exception, and that deprivation of liberty before conviction has a substantial punitive content. The court....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the stringent parameters for granting bail under the NDPS Act, emphasizing the gravity of drug trafficking offences and the legislative intent to p....
The court held that bail cannot be granted under the NDPS Act without satisfying the statutory requirements of demonstrating that the accused is not guilty of the offence and is unlikely to commit fu....
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
