High CourtsSingle Bench(2021) 09 P&H CK 0039

Simranpal Singh vs Union Of India Through Intelligence Officer, Narcotics Control Bureau, Chandigarh

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 17 September 2021

HON’BLE JUDGES
Avneesh Jhingan, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Petition (M) No. 10276 Of 2021

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

10 paragraphs · 259 words

Avneesh Jhingan, J

1.

Due to COVID-19 situation, the Court is convened through video conference.

2.

This petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is filed for seeking regular bail in Crime No. 49, dated 29. 09.2020, under Sections 8, 20, 25, 27-A and 29 of NDPS Act, 1985 registered at Police Station Mullanpur, SAS Nagar, Mohali.

3.

The case against the petitioner is that he is one of the occupants of the car from which the recovery of 1 kg 5 gm of charas was made.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no recovery was made from the conscious position of the petitioner. The recovery was made from the petitioner is marginally higher than commercial quantity. Petitioner has no criminal antecedents. Investigation is complete. Petitioner is in custody since 29.09.2020. No recovery was made from the petitioner.

5.

Learned counsel appearing for NCB opposes the prayer for grant of regular bail. She submits that recovery is of commercial quantity. During investigation, it revealed that petitioner had paid Rs. 42,000/- as part payment for purchase of Charas.

6.

Petitioner is in custody since September, 2020. Investigation is complete, he has no criminal antecedents. The recovery is of commercial quantity.

7.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case in totality, petitioner is granted bail subject to her furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned.

8.

The petition is allowed.

9.

It is clarified that observations made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.