IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:-28.01.2025 Hari Pal ......Petitioner.

Versus State of Punjab ......Respondent.

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI Present:- Mr. Rishu Mahajan, Advocate for the Petitioner.

Mr. Harkanwar Jeet Singh, AAG Punjab.

***

JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J.(ORAL)

The Prayer in this second petition under section 439 Cr.PC is for the grant of regular bail in case FIR No.98 dated 07.06.2023 under Sections 21(C)/25/27A of NDPS Act, 1985 and Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 registered at Police Station Navi Baradari, District Jalandhar.

2. The brief facts of the case are that Lovepreet Singh @ Raja, Jasbir @ Jasvir Singh @ Padda (since granted bail vide order dated 12.12.2024 in CRM-M-61282-2024), Vikas @ Rubal and Haripal @ Hari (petitioner) were apprehended. During the course of their search a .315 bore loaded country made pistol came to be recovered from the left pocket of Lovepreet Singh @ Raja and from one black coloured bag a polythene packet was recovered containing 1Kg 500 grams of Heroin and Rs.53,000/-

cash.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. The mandatory provisions of Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act have not been complied with in their proper perspective. No independent witness was joined at the time of search and seizure. As he was first-time offender, in custody for 01 year 07 months and 11 days and only 01 of the 13 prosecution witnesses had been examined so far, the trial of the present case was not likely to be concluded anytime soon and therefore, he was entitled to the concession of bail in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Nitish Adhikary @ Bapan Versus The State of West Bengal, SLP (Crl.) Nos.5769/2022 arising out of judgment and order dated 04.05.2022 in CRM(NDPS) No.442/2022, decided on 01.08.2022 and Hasanujjaman & others Versus The State of West Bengal, SLP (Crl.) No.(s).3221/2023 arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 29.11.2022 in CRM(NDPS) No.1323/2022, decided on 04.05.2023

4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel contends that commercial quantity of contraband has been recovered from the petitioner. Therefore, in view of the bar contained under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, the petitioner was not entitled to the grant of bail. He, however, concedes that the petitioner is a first time offender, in custody for 01 year 07 months and 11 days and only 01 of the 13 prosecution witnesses had been examined so far.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Nitish Adhikary @ Bapan Vs. The State of West Bengal SLP (Crl.) Nos.5769/2022 Decided on

01.08.2022 held as under:-

“As per the office report dated 29.07.2022, copy of the show cause notice along with Special Leave Petition was supplied to the Standing Counsel for the State of West Bengal and separate notice has been served on the State also. However, no one has entered appearance on their behalf.

The petitioner seeks enlargement on bail in F.I.R. No.

612 of 2020 dated 17.10.2020 filed under Section 21(c) and 37 of the NDPS 2 Act, registered at Police Station Bongaon, West Bengal.

During the course of the hearing, we are informed that the petitioner has undergone custody for a period of 01 year and 07 months as on 09.06.2022. The trial is at a preliminary stage, as only one witness has been examined.

The petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents Taking into consideration the period of sentence undergone by the petitioner and all the attending circumstances but without expressing any views in the merits of the case, we are inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

The petitioner is accordingly, directed to be released on bail subject to him furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

The Special Leave Petition is disposed of on the aforestated terms.

Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed o