Back
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
JASJIT SINGH BEDI
Sukhwinder Kaur – Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Jasjit Singh Bedi, J.
The prayer in this petition under Section 438 Cr.PC is for the grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 19 dated 13.02.2024 under Sections 21/29 (Act No.61) of NDPS Act, 1985 registered at Police Station Sadar Dhuri, District Sangrur.2. The brief facts of the case are that the instant FIR came to be registered that Lakhvir Singh @ Lakha was seen throwing a transparent polythene envelope taken out from his trouser which was found to contain 50 grams of Heroin.
During investigation Lakhvir Singh @ Lakha disclosed that he had brought the Heroin from Sukhwinder Kaur @ Sukho (petitioner). On the basis of the said disclosure statement Sukhwinder Kaur @ Sukho was nominated as an accused on 15.02.2024 and the offence under Section 29 of the NDPS Act was added.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that as the petitioner has been named in the disclosure statement of her co-accused without any corroborative evidence, she was entitled to the concession of bail. Reliance is placed on the judgments in the cases of Tofan Singh Versus State of Tamil Nadu, 2020 AIR (Supreme Court) 5592, Rakesh Kumar Singla Versus Union of India, 2021(1) RCR (Criminal) 70
A habitual offender under the NDPS Act is not entitled to anticipatory bail based on weak evidence from co-accused.
Bail may be granted if the accused is named in a co-accused's disclosure statement without corroborative evidence, especially after substantial custody time, aligning with the right to a speedy trial....
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
