2023:PHHC:126615

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

272

CRR-846-2023 (O&M)

Date of Decision: 27.09.2023

Joginder @ Chintu

...Petitioner

Vs.

State of Haryana

...Respondent

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.S.SHEKHAWAT

Present :

Mr. P.S. Saini, Advocate

for the petitioner.

Mr. Gaurav Gurcharan Singh Rai, DAG, Haryana.

N.S.SHEKHAWAT

, J. (Oral)

1.

The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section

401 Cr.P.C. with a prayer to set-aside the impugned order dated

09.08.2022 passed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge,

Fatehabad, whereby, the bail application filed by the present petitioner

under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. and Section 36-A of the Narcotic Drugs

and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter to be referred as

'the NDPS Act') in case arising out of FIR No. 92 dated 03.02.2022

under Section 21(b) 27-A/29/61/85 of the NDPS Act registered at

Police Station City, Fatehabad, was ordered to be dismissed.

2.

The FIR in the present case was registered on the basis of

the statement made by ASI Major Singh, Anti Narcotic Cell,

Fatehabad. Since, the petitioner had filed the present application

under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. and Section 36-A of the NDPS Act

AMIT RANA

2023.10.04 10:28

I attest to the accuracy and

authenticity of this order/judgment

Chandigarh

CRR-846-2023 (O&M)

2023:PHHC:126615 -2-

before the trial Court for grant of concession of bail to him, only on

the ground that the complete challan was not presented by the

prosecution within a period of 180 days, so there is no need to

reproduce the detail of the case in the present order.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that in the

present case, the petitioner was ordered to be arrested on 03.02.2022

and the final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C., without the FSL report,

was presented against the petitioner on 26.03.2022. The petitioner had

completed 180 days in custody on 03.08.2022. Consequently, the

petitioner moved an application under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. with a

prayer to release him on default bail. Learned counsel further

submitted that the trial Court had wrongly dismissed the bail

application filed by the petitioner without assigning any cogent

reasons and despite knowing the fact that the incomplete challan, i.e.,

the challan without the FSL report had been filed by the police before

the Special Court. Learned counsel further submitted that the

provisions contained in Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. conferred an

indefeasible right on the present petitioner to claim his bail as a matter

of right. In fact, the report of the chemical examiner was an essential

and integral part of the investigation under the NDPS Act, which

would also determine the culpability of the accused and the Court

could take cognizance on the basis of the said report only.

Consequently, any challan presented by the Investigating Agency

without FSL report would be an incomplete challan and the petitioner

AMIT RANA

2023.10.04 10:28

I attest to the accuracy and

authenticity of this order/judgment

Chandigarh

CRR-846-2023 (O&M)

2023:PHHC:126615 -3-

would be entitled to be released on bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C.

Learned counsel for the petitioner also placed reliance on the

judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of M.

Ravindran Vs. The Intelligence Officer, Directorate of Revenue

Intelligence, 2021(2) SCC 485; 2020(4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 800. He

also placed reliance on the judgments passed by this Court in the

matters of Ajit Singh @ Jeeta and another Vs. State of Punjab

(CRR 4659 of 2015)Suresh Vs. State of Haryana (CRR 1135 of

2020), Saleem @ Mulla Vs. State of Haryana (CRM-M-11271 of

2021), Surjit Singh @ Seeta Vs. State of Punjab (CRR 1039 of

2020), Julfkar Vs. State of Haryana (CRR 1125 of 2020).

4.

On the other hand, learned State counsel had vehemently

opposed the prayer