PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J.
Gurpreet Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent
CRM-M-4911-2024 (O & M)
Decided on : 07-02-2024
JUDGMENT :
Jasjit Singh Bedi, J. (Oral)
1. The prayer in the present petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.0304 dated 30.06.2022 under Sections 15, 27-A, 29 of the NDPS Act, registered at Police Station City Mandi Dabwali, District Sirsa.
2. The brief facts of the case are that while the police party was on patrolling duty, secret information was received that Surender Singh alias Babbi (since granted bail vide order dated 19.01.2024 passed in CRM-M-1653-2024) son of Angrej Singh and Hargobind Singh @ Ghilla (since granted bail vide order dated 06.02.2024 passed in CRM-M-41406-2023) son of Hardev Singh, owner and truck driver of truck No.HR 57A-7298, namely, Gursewak Singh @ Sewak, Brezza car No.HR-25H-2885 and truck conductor name not known alongwith others did the business of selling doda post. They were bringing doda post in large quantity frrom Madhya Pradesh in a truck and would unload the truck at village Desujodha in the nearby fields and by concealing it in the fields they would further sell to their customers by contacting them. On 29.06.2022 at night, Surender Singh alias Babbi filled doda post in the said truck bearing No.HR57A-7298 and piloting the truck was a Brezza car bearing No.HR-25H-2885. The doda post was brought to village Desujodha and was hidden in a room in the fields of Harjeet Singh and that land was taken on lease from Hargobind Singh @ Ghilla. Surender Singh @ Babbi and Hargobind Singh @ Ghilla were sitting together in the front of the room built in the fields waiting for the customers and trying to sell the doda post. If the place was raided, then the persons could be apprehended.
Based on the information, the FIR was registered, a raid was conducted and a recovery of 1050 Kgs. of doda post was effected.
During the course of investigation, Surender Singh @ Babbi and Hargobind Singh @ Ghilla made their confessions that out of 50 bags of doda post brought by them from Gurpreet Singh (petitioner) of Madhya Pradesh, 05 bags were sold to Chamkaur Singh (since granted bail vide order dated 22.12.2022 passed in CRM-M-41585-2022).
On 03.07.2022 co-accused Gurpreet Singh was arrested and made his disclosure statement stating that he alongwith Dhaba Owner Irfan Khan @ Aarif Khan (since granted bail vide order dated 13.04.2023 passed in CRM-M-60923-2022) son of Sharafat Khan had sold the recovered poppy husk to the accused persons. A sum of Rs.10,000/- was recovered from Gurpreet Singh.
During the investigation, on the identification of Gurpreet Singh, Irfan Khan @ Aarif Khan was arrested by the police on 10.07.2022. Three mobile phones alongwith SIM card and one Baleno car bearing registration No.MP-09WM-0904 were recovered from Irfan @ Aarif Khan. A sum of Rs.20,000/- was also recovered from him.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner had been falsely implicated in the present case. He contends that the name of the petitioner figured in the disclosure statement of his co-accused namely, Surender Singh @ Babbi and Hargobind Singh @ Ghilla which has little evidentiary value. 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) 704, Surinder Kumar Khanna Versus Intelligence Officer Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, 2018(3) RCR (Criminal) 954, State by (NCB) Bengaluru Versus Pallulabid Ahmad Arimutta & Anr. 2022(1) RCR (Criminal) 762, Sanjeev Chandra Agarwal & Anr. Versus Union of India 2021(4) RCR (Criminal) 590, Vijay Singh Versus The State of Haryana, bearing Special Leave to Appeal (Crl) No.(s).1266/2023 decided on 17.05.2023, State of Haryana versus Samarth Kumar 2022 (3) RCR (Criminal) 991 and Vikrant Singh Versus State of Punjab, CRM-M-396572020, wherein it has been held that the accused can be granted the concession of regular bail where he has been named in the disclosure statement
Bail can be granted when an accused is named in a co-accused's disclosure statement but no recovery is made, especially if the trial is likely to be prolonged.
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....
Bail can be granted when an accused is named in a co-accused's disclosure statement without recovery, especially if they are a first-time offender and the trial is delayed.
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.