IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Anoop Chitkara, J.
Darshan Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana – Respondent
CRM-M-18723-2022
Decided On : 05-05-2022
NDPS Act - Anticipatory Bail - Sections 15-B, 29 - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed the provisions of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) including definitions of commercial and small quantities, minimum and maximum sentences, and bail conditions under Section 37. The court also referenced relevant case laws to interpret the provisions and their applicability to the present case.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought anticipatory bail after being implicated as the seller of poppy husk in a case under Sections 15-B and 29 of the NDPS Act. The police recovered the contraband from a co-accused who named the petitioner during interrogation.
Finding of the Court:
The court considered the quantity of the substance involved, the petitioner's criminal antecedents, and relevant case laws to grant bail. It emphasized the need to balance individual rights with the state's interest in ensuring an uninterrupted investigation.
Issues: The main issues were the applicability of bail conditions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, the petitioner's criminal antecedents, and the potential influence on the investigation and witnesses.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the quantity of the substance, the petitioner's first-time offender status, and the need to balance individual rights with the state's interest in ensuring an uninterrupted investigation.
Final Decision: The court granted the petitioner bail with specific terms and conditions to ensure cooperation with the investigation and prevent potential influence on witnesses and evidence.
JUDGMENT
Anoop Chitkara, J.
FIR No. | Dated | Police Station | Sections |
97 | 14.04.2022 | Guhla, District Kaithal | 15-B and 29 of NDPS Act, 1985 |
1. On being named by the main accused in his custodial interrogation as the seller of the contraband, the petitioner, apprehending arrest for violating the above-mentioned provisions of Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) as per the FIR captioned above had come up before this Court under Section 438 CrPC seeking anticipatory bail.
2. In paragraph 12 of the bail petition, the accused declares that he has no criminal antecedents.
3. On Apr 14, 2022, the police recovered 1 kg & 350 grams of poppy husk from the co-accused, Jhirmal Singh, who during his interrogation implicated the petitioner as its seller.
4. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner contends that the custodial investigation would serve no purpose whatsoever, and the pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and family.
5. Ld. counsel representing the State opposes bail.
REASONING:
6. The substance involved in the present case is poppy husk, and weighs 1 kilo gram and 350 grams. Entry no. 110 of the table specifying small and commercial quantities specifies the quantity greater than 50 kg as commercial quantity and lesser than 1000 gram as small. Thus, the quantity allegedly involved in this case is not commercial. Given this, the rigours of S. 37 of the NDPS Act do apply in the present case.
7. Section 2 (vii-a) of the NDPS Act defines commercial quantity as the quantity greater than the quantity specified in the schedule. Section 2 (xxiii-a) defines small quantity as a quantity less than the quantity specified in the table of the NDPS Act. The remaining quantity falls in an undefined category, generally called an intermediate quantity. All Sections in the NDPS Act, which specify an offence, also mention the minimum and maximum sentence, depending upon the quantity of the substance. The commercial quantity mandates a minimum sentence of ten years of imprisonment and a minimum fine of Rupees One hundred thousand, and bail is subject to the riders mandated in S. 37 of NDPS Act. When the quantity is less than commercial, the restrictions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act will not attract, and the factors for bail become similar to the offence regular statutes.
8. In Sami Ullaha v Superintendent Narcotic Control Bureau, (2008) 16 SCC 471, the Hon'ble Supreme Court holds that in intermediate quantity, the rigors of the provisions of Section 37 may not be justified.
9. The petitioner is a first offender, and one of the relevant factors would be to provide an opportunity to course-correct. Even a primafacie perusal of paragraph 3 to 6 of the bail petition needs consideration for bail.
10. In Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v State of Punjab, 1980 (2) SCC 565, (Para 30), a Constitutional Bench of Supreme Court held that the bail decision must enter the cumulative effect of the variety of circumstances justifying the grant or refusal of bail. In Kalyan Chandra Sarkar v Rajesh Ranjan @ Pappu Yadav, 2005 (2) SCC 42, (Para 18) a three-member Bench of Supreme Court held that the persons accused of non-bailable offences are entitled to bail if the Court concerned concludes that the prosecution has failed to establish a prima facie case against him, or despite the existence of a prima facie case, the Court records reasons for its satisfaction for the need to release such person on bail, in the given fact situations. The rejection of bail does not preclude filing a subsequent application. The courts can release on bail, provided the circumstances then prevailing requires, and a change in the fact situation. In State of Rajasthan v Balchand, AIR 1977 SC 2447, (Para 2 & 3), Supreme Court noticeably illustrated that the basic rule might perhaps be tersely put as bail, not jail, except where there are circumstances suggestive of fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of re
Dataram Singh v State of Uttar Pradesh
Gudikanti Narasimhulu v Public Prosecutor
Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v State of Punjab
Kalyan Chandra Sarkar v Rajesh Ranjan @ Pappu Yadav
Prahlad Singh Bhati v NCT, Delhi
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need to balance individual rights with the state's interest in ensuring an uninterrupted investigation and preventing potential influence on wi....
The court emphasized the need for judicious consideration of bail petitions for accused with criminal history and the implications of the quantity of the substance on bail conditions.
The court emphasized the need for judicious consideration of bail petitions for accused with criminal history and highlighted the impact of substance quantity on bail provisions under the NDPS Act.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the quantity of the substance involved and the petitioner's criminal antecedents are crucial factors in determining the applicability of bail ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the consideration of quantity of contraband, definitions of commercial and small quantity under the NDPS Act, and the factors to be weighed in gran....
The court's decision emphasized the need to consider the quantity of the substance, legal precedents related to bail considerations, and the balance between individual rights and the right of police ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the admissibility of evidence, the conditions for granting bail in non-bailable offences, and the discretion of the court to impose specific terms ....
The court exercises its discretion in granting bail based on the quantity of drugs involved, the accused's criminal history, and the need for course correction. The court also imposes stringent condi....
The court balanced the individual's right to bail with the necessity of a fair trial, emphasizing the need for stringent conditions to prevent tampering with evidence and ensure cooperation with the ....
The court considered the quantity of the substance involved, the petitioner's criminal history, and age, and granted bail. The court also imposed stringent conditions to prevent any influence on the ....
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.