The High Court
Case Details
CRM-M-23625-2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-23625-2023 Reserved on: 04.02.2025 Pronounced on: 14.02.2025 Ja(cid:4)n Nanda ...Pe(cid:4)(cid:4)oner Versus State of Punjab …Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present:
Legal Reasoning
Mr. Karanbir Singh, Advocate, for the pe(cid:4)(cid:4)oner. Mr. Jasjit Singh, DAG, Punjab. ANOOP CHITKARA, J. **** FIR No. Dated Police Sta0on Sec0ons 167 07.10.2022 Kartarpur, Jalandhar Rural Dis*. 22 of NDPS Act (Sec(cid:4)on 29 of NDPS Act added later on) 1. The pe(cid:4)(cid:4)oner incarcerated in the FIR cap(cid:4)oned above had come up before this Court under Sec(cid:4)on 439 CrPC, 1973, seeking regular bail. 2. Vide order dated 13.02.2024, the pe(cid:4)(cid:4)oner was granted interim bail, which con(cid:4)nues to (cid:4)ll date. 3. As per paragraph 10 of the bail pe(cid:4)(cid:4)on and as per paragraph 13 of reply dated 08.04.2024, the accused has the following criminal antecedents: Sr. No. 1. FIR No. 113 Dated Offenses Police Sta0on 01.07.2018 22/61/85 of NDPS Act Division No.1, Jalandhar City 4. The facts and allega(cid:4)ons are taken from the reply dated 08.04.2024 filed by the State. On 07.10.2022, based on chance recovery, the Police seized 7000 intoxicant tablets i.e. Tramadol from the possession of co-accused Hardeep Singh. The co-accused had disclosed in his disclosure statement that he had purchased the said tablets from the pe(cid:4)(cid:4)oner. The Inves(cid:4)gator claims to have complied with all the statutory requirements of the NDPS Act, 1985, and CrPC, 1973. 5. The pe(cid:4)(cid:4)oner's counsel argued that the name of the pe(cid:4)(cid:4)oner has been surfaced JYOTI 2025.02.15 12:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. 1 CRM-M-23625-2023 on the basis of disclosure statement of co-accused Hardeep Singh. He further submits that no recovery has been effected from the pe(cid:4)(cid:4)oner. The pe(cid:4)(cid:4)oner's counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent condi(cid:4)ons. The pe(cid:4)(cid:4)oner’s counsel argued that the custodial inves(cid:4)ga(cid:4)on would serve no purpose whatsoever and the pre-trial incarcera(cid:4)on would cause an irreversible injus(cid:4)ce to the pe(cid:4)(cid:4)oner and family. 6. The State’s counsel opposes bail and refers to paras 6 and 7 of the reply dated 08.04.2024, which reads as follows: “Role of the pe(cid:11)(cid:11)oner 6. That the pe(cid:11)(cid:11)oner was arrested on 06.02.2023 by the inves(cid:11)ga(cid:11)ng officer during the course of inves(cid:11)ga(cid:11)on. During his custodial interroga(cid:11)on, the pe(cid:11)(cid:11)oner suffered a disclosure statement dated 08.02.2023 disclosing therein that he was involved in sale of intoxicant tablets from the last 2/3 years by procuring the same from U(arakhand. He further disclosed that he came in touch with the co-accused Hardeep Singh, who agreed to sale the intoxicant tablets a-er purchasing from him (pe(cid:11)(cid:11)oner) and he used to contact the co-accused Hardeep Singh by calling him from his mobile phone No. 79863-xxxxx to his mobile No. 70878-xxxxx. 7. That the call details record (CDR) of the mobile phone No.79863-xxxxx of the pe(cid:11)(cid:11)oner and mobile phone No.70878-xxxxx of co-accused Hardeep Singh was obtained from the concerned Telecom Companies and on its examina(cid:11)on, it was found that the pe(cid:11)(cid:11)oner and the co-accused Hardeep Singh had exchanged 40 calls with each other from 01.02.2022 to 06.10.2022.” REASONING: 7. 8. 9. An analysis of the above would lead to the following outcome. The quan(cid:4)ty involved is 7000 intoxicant tablets, which is primafacie commercial. Given this, the rigors of S. 37 of the NDPS Act apply in the present case. 10. The pe(cid:4)(cid:4)oner was granted interim protec(cid:4)on, and at that (cid:4)me also, the Court was aware of the quan(cid:4)ty being commercial. During the interregnum, there is no allega(cid:4)on that he had in(cid:4)midated the witnesses, hampered the inves(cid:4)ga(cid:4)on, or did not join the trial. 11. As per paragraph 11 of the bail pe(cid:4)(cid:4)on, the pe(cid:4)(cid:4)oner has been in custody since 06.02.2023. As per the custody cer(cid:4)ficate dated 03.02.2025, the pe(cid:4)(cid:4)oner’s total custody in this FIR is more than one year. Given the penal provisions invoked viz-a-viz JYOTI 2025.02.15 12:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. 2 CRM-M-23625-2023 pre-trial custody, coupled with the primafacie analysis of the nature of allega(cid:4)ons, and the other factors peculiar to this case, there would be no jus(cid:4)fiability for further pre-trial incarcera(cid:4)on at this stage. 12. The evidence might be primafacie sufficient to launch prosecu(cid:4)on or to frame charges, but this Court is not considering the evidence at that stage but is analyzing the same for the bail stage. 13. Without commen(cid:4)ng on the case's merits, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, and for the reasons men(cid:4)oned above, the pe(cid:4)(cid:4)oner makes a case for bail, subject to the compliance of addi(cid:4)onal condi(cid:4)ons men(cid:4)oned below. Given the above, there would be no jus(cid:4)fica(cid:4)on to discon(cid:4)nue the interim protec(cid:4)on, which is made absolute. 14. Given the background of allega(cid:4)ons against the pe(cid:4)(cid:4)oner, it becomes paramount to protect the complainant, witnesses, and members of society, detec(cid:4)on staff and incapacita(cid:4)ng the accused would be one of the primary op(cid:4)ons un(cid:4)l the filing of the closure report or discharge, or acqui*al. Consequently, it would be appropriate to restrict the possession of firearm(s). [This restric(cid:4)on is being imposed based on the preponderance of evidence of probability and not of evidence of certainty, i.e., beyond reasonable doubt; and as such, it is not to be construed as an intermediate sanc(cid:4)on]. Given the nature of the allega(cid:4)ons and the other circumstances peculiar to this case, the pe(cid:4)(cid:4)oner shall surrender all weapons, firearms, and ammuni(cid:4)on, if any, along with the arms license to the concerned authority within fiLeen days from release from prison and inform the Inves(cid:4)gator about the compliance. However, subject to the Indian Arms Act, 1959, the pe(cid:4)(cid:4)oner shall be en(cid:4)tled to renew and take it back in case of acqui*al, provided otherwise permissible in the concerned rules. Restric(cid:4)ng firearms would ins(cid:4)ll confidence in the vic(cid:4)m(s), their families, and society; it would also restrain the accused from influencing the witnesses and repea(cid:4)ng the offense. 15. This bail is condi(cid:13)onal, and the founda(cid:13)onal condi(cid:13)on is that if the pe(cid:13)(cid:13)oner indulges in any non-bailable offense, the State shall file an applica(cid:13)on for cancella(cid:13)on of this bail before the Sessions Court, which shall have the liberty to cancel this bail. 16. The concerned trial court is authorized to delete, modify, or relax any of the above condi(cid:4)ons and shall be competent to do so in accordance with the law. 17. Any observa(cid:4)on made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments. JYOTI 2025.02.15 12:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. 3 CRM-M-23625-2023 18. Pe00on allowed in terms men(cid:4)oned above. Interim order dated 13.02.2024 is
Decision
made absolute. All pending applica(cid:4)ons, if any, stand disposed of. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 14.02.2025 Jyo0-II Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable: Yes No. JYOTI 2025.02.15 12:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. 4