High CourtsSingle Bench(2019) 07 P&H CK 0026

Mohinder Singh vs State Of Punjab

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 5 July 2019

HON’BLE JUDGES
Mahabir Singh Sindhu, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Petition (M) No. 26164 Of 2019

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

16 paragraphs · 298 words

Mahabir Singh Sindhu, J

Present petition has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr. P.C.') for grant of bail to the petitioner, in

FIR No.12 dated 21.03.2019, under Section 16 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and Sections 61/1/14 of Excise Act,

registered at Police Station Dharamgarh, District Sangrur.

As per prosecution case, contraband was recovered from the open fields belonging to the petitioner.

Contends that petitioner is 75 years old and recovery is from the open fields, thus, merely that he is the owner of the land, cannot be held liable in the

present case. Also contends that after investigation, report under Section 173 Cr. P.C. has already been submitted on 27.06.2019 and there are total

14 prosecution witnesses, but none has been examined.

Since the investigation is already over, petitioner is 75 years old and no recovery was effected from his possession; rather the same was from open

fields and he was not present on the spot, thus, point of conscious possession is debatable in this case. Consequently, without commenting on the

merits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to release the petitioner on bail pending trial.

In view of the above, this petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, in this case, on his furnishing adequate bail bonds and surety

bonds to the satisfaction of learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.

The above observations may not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

The petitioner shall fully co-operate with learned trial Court without seeking any unnecessary adjournments. It is also clarified that in case there is

recurrence on his part, State would be at liberty to move an application for recalling of this order.