Mankomal Singh v. The State of Punjab
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 15 Jul 2009
- Bench
- RAJAN GUPTA
Provisions considered
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 ss. 15, 25, 37, 61
Judgment
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. Inderjeet Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Rajan Gupta, J. The petitioner is seeking regular bail in case registered against against him under Section 15/25/61/85 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 at Police Station Kotwali, District Bathinda, vide FIR No.225 dated 2nd May, 2007. According to the allegations in the FIR on 2nd May, 2007 at about 8.30 P.M., the petitioner along with his co-accused was found in possession of 520 Kgs of poppy husk in the area of Housefed Colony, Bathinda. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case as he was not apprehended on the spot. This apart, the prosecution story is highly improbable. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and given careful thought to the facts of the case. CRM No. M-13714 of 2009 2 The recovery alleged in the instant case is quite heavy. Thirteen gunny bags of poppy husk were recovered, each containing 40 Kgs thereof. Provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act would be attracted to the present case. I, thus, do not find it a fit case for grant of concession of bail. The same is hereby dismissed. (RAJAN GUPTA) JUDGE July 15, 2009 'rajpal'
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — ss. 15, 25, 37, 61.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 15 Jul 2009. The bench was RAJAN GUPTA.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.