Back
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
HARPREET SINGH BRAR
Ravinder Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Harpreet Singh Brar, J.
Vide this common order, I intend to dispose of CRM-M Nos.63888 and 34816 of 2024, as common questions of law and facts are involved for adjudication. For the sake of convenience, facts are taken from CRM-M-63888-2024.
2. Prayer in both these petitions filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 (erstwhile Section 439 of Cr.P.C.) is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner(s) namely Ravinder Singh and Jassa Singh @ Moong in FIR No.68 dated 26.08.2023 registered under Section 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short 'the NDPS Act') at Police Station Ballianwali, District Bathinda.
3. The brief facts of the case are that on 26.08.2023, two persons namely Ravinder Singh and Jagga Singh @ Mangu were arrested by the police for keeping in possession 1400 tables of Tramacel-100 (Tramadol) without any permit or license and during the course of investigation, 250 more tablets were recovered from the possession of said accused Ravinder Singh, on the basis of the disclosure statement made by him. Subsequently, the FIR (supra) was registered.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner (in CRM-M-63888- 2024) inter alia contends that this is t
The court ruled that under the NDPS Act, bail requires reasonable grounds for believing the accused are not guilty and unlikely to offend again, regardless of detention length.
Undue delay in trial justifies granting bail, even under stringent provisions of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.
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
