SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(P&H) 1853

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Vikas Bahl, J.
Amritpal Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab – Respondent
CRM-M-30560-2021
Decided On : 26-05-2022

Advocates appeared:
Mr.J.S.Sandhu, Advocate and Mr.Navjot Singh, Advocate, for the Appellant; Mr. Sarabjit Singh Cheema, AAG, Punjab., for the Respondent

Recovery from a thrown plastic bag raises a debatable issue of conscious possession, and the court may grant bail considering factors such as custody, pending examination of prosecution witnesses, and absence of involvement in other NDPS Act cases.

Headnote:

Regular Bail - Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act - Section 22/61/85 - Summary

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought regular bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in a case registered under Section 22/61/85 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act 1985. The petitioner was alleged to have thrown a plastic bag containing contraband upon seeing the police party and was apprehended at the spot.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the recovery of contraband from the thrown plastic bag raised a debatable issue regarding the conscious possession of the petitioner. The court also noted that the petitioner had been in custody, the challan had been presented, and prosecution witnesses were yet to be examined.

Issues: The key issue was whether the petitioner could be said to be in conscious possession of the contraband recovered from the thrown plastic bag, and whether the bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act applied due to the recovery of commercial quantity.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on judicial precedents to establish that the recovery from a thrown plastic bag raised a debatable issue of conscious possession. It also considered the petitioner's custody, the pending examination of prosecution witnesses, and the absence of involvement in any other case under the NDPS Act.

Final Decision: The court allowed the petition and ordered the petitioner's release on bail, subject to specified conditions to ensure compliance and prevent future offenses under the NDPS Act.

JUDGMENT

Vikasbahl, J. (Oral) - This is a first petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR no.17 dated 27.02.2021 registered under Section 22/61/85 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, Act 1985 at Police Station Sadar Rampura, District Bathinda.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the preesnt case, the petitioner has been in custody since 27.02.2021 and challan has already been presented and there are 11 prosecution witnesses and none of them have been examined and the petitioner is not involved in any other case. It is further submitted that as per the FIR, the petitioner was stated to be holding a plastic transparent (pardarshi) bag which he had thrown on seeing the police party and had tried to run away but was apprehended by the police on the spot. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon decision of a Coordinate Bench of this Court in CRM-M- 16150-2021 dated 19.07.2021 titled as Balwinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab and on judgment in CRM-M-33733-2020 dated 15.03.2021 titled as Manjit Singh Vs. State of Punjab alongwith connected matters to contend that in such a situation the question as to whether the petitioner was in conscious possession of the contraband is a debatable issue since the alleged recovery had been made from the plastic bag lying on the ground. Further reliance has been placed upon various orders passed by coordinate Benches of this Court i.e. order dated 02.08.2021 passed in CRM-M-4408-2021 titled as 'Banti Kaur @ Bhanti Kaur Vs. State of Punjab, Jaskaran Singh @ Jassu Vs. State of Punjab, reported as 2021(2) RCR (Criminal) 837, Binder Kaur @ Goga Vs. State of Punjab reported as 2021(3) RCR (Criminal) 360, and order dated 28.02.2020 passed in CRM-M-8026-2020 titled as Lakhwinder Singh @ Lakha Vs. State of Punjab in which it was held that in a case where the accused is stated to have been carrying narcotic drugs in a transparent plastic bag, then the said issue would also be a debatable one as it is highly unlikely that the accused would carry such substances in a transparent polythene and would entitle the petitioner to bail.

3. Learned State counsel has opposed the present petition for regular bail and has submitted that the police party had seen the petitioner throwing the plastic bag and thus, the question of the petitioner not being in conscious possession of the recovered contraband, does not arise. It is further submitted that recovery in the present case is of commercial quantity and thus, the bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act would apply.

4. This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties.

5. In Balwinder Singh's case (Supra), a Coordinate Bench of this Court has held as under:

    'Briefly stated, case of the prosecution against the petitioner is that on 04.03.2019 police party headed by ASI Ravinder Singh on patrolling duty were coming to Tehang Octroi via Saiflabad. When they reached near Civil Hospital, Phillour they saw the petitioner coming on foot who on seeing the police party threw one heavy weight black coloured polythene bag and tried to run away. The police apprehended the petitioner and on search as per prescribed procedure recovered 55 intoxicant injections containing Buprenorhpine 2 ml each and 55 injections containing Avil 10 ml each from the polythene bag.

    XXX---XXX---XXX

    On the other hand, learned State Counsel has argued that the petitioner kept in his conscious possession commercial quantity of intoxicant injections. Rigors of Section 37(1)(b) are fully applicable to the case of the petitioner. The petitioner does not deserve the concession of regular bail. Therefore, the petition may be dismissed.

    However learned State Counsel has conceded that the petitioner is not involved in any other case under the NDPS Act.

    In CRM-M-13662-2020 titled as 'Niranjan Kumar @ Kaka Vs. State of Punjab' decided on 06.07.2020; CRM-M-14474- 2020 titled as 'Dharminder Singh Vs. State of Punjab' decided on 24.06.

      Click Here to Read the rest of this document
      1
      2
      3
      4
      5
      6
      7
      8
      9
      10
      11
      SupremeToday Portrait Ad
      supreme today icon
      logo-black

      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

      qr

      Scan Me!

      India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

      For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

      whatsapp-icon Back to top