Vikram Kumar vs State of Punjab

Mehinder Singh Sullar, J.—Tersely, the facts and material, which need a necessary mention, for the limited purpose of deciding the instant petition for regular bail and emanating from the record, are that, a police party after completion of the statutory procedure, searched the bag of the petitioner on the basis of suspicion. In the wake of search of bag, ten strips each containing 8 capsules (80) of Spasmo Proxyvon and 280 gm intoxicant powder etc, were recovered from the possession of the petitioner, without any permit or license. On the basis of the recovery of aforesaid commercial commodity of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, a criminal case was registered against the petitioner-accused, vide FIR No. 54 dated 15.08.2012, for the commission of an offence punishable u/s 22 of The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter to be referred as ''the NDPS Act''), by the police of Police Station Badali Ala Singh, District Fatehgarh Sahib, in the manner depicted here-in-above.

Now the petitioner has preferred the instant petition for regular bail, invoking the provisions of Section 439 read with Section 167(2)(a) of Cr.P.C.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, going through the record with their valuable assistance and after deep consideration of the entire matter, to my mind, there is no merit in the present petition in this context.

As is evident from the record that in pursuance of the application (Annexure P-3), filed by the SHO, forwarded by PP, the Special Judge has already extended the statutory period, to submit the final police report (challan), vide order dated 07.02.2013 . The prosecution has already submitted the challan, within the extended period. The petitioner-accused has already been charge-sheeted and the case was slated for evidence of the prosecution. Once it is proved that the prosecution has already submitted the final police report, within the extended period, in that eventuality, the petitioner is not entitled to regular bail, u/s 167(2) Cr.P.C., as contrary urged on his behalf.

Ex facie, the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner that since the final police report (challan) was submitted by the police beyond the statutory period of 180 days and the extension of time by the Special Judge, on the application (Annexure P-3) filed by the SHO was illegal, so, the petitioner is entitled to regular bail, are neither tenable nor the observations of Hon''ble Apex Court in case Sanjay Kumar Kedia @ Sanjay Kedia Vs. Intelligence Officer, Narcotic Control Bureau and Another, , are at all applicable to the facts of the present case, wherein the application for extension of time moved by the SHO was held to be defective in the absence of opinion of the public prosecutor, as contemplated u/s 36A(4) of the NDPS Act.

Possibly no one can dispute with regard to the aforesaid observations, but to me, the same would not come to the rescue of the petitioner, in the instant controversy. As in the instant case, the application (Annexure P-3) was placed before the public prosecutor, at the first instance. He perused the same and allowed it to be put up with paper and forwarded the same to the Court. Moreover, it has been specifically mentioned in the application that the sample of intoxicant powder and Spasmo Proxyvon capsules, were sent to Forensic Science Laboratory, Mohali (for brevity ''the FSL'') on 21.08.2012 through Constable Harpreet Singh, vide RC No. 122 and the report of chemical examination has not yet been received. Reminders were sent to the Director FSL on 09.01.2013 and 04.02.2013, for obtaining the report of chemical examiner. On that account, the challan could not be presented and the prosecution prayed for extension of the time, to submit the final police report, in the Court.

Meaning thereby, the application, containing the valid grounds, for extension of time was produced by the SHO before the concerned public prosecutor, at the first instance. Considering the cogent grounds, the public prosecutor allowed it to be up with paper and forwarded to the Special Judge. Taking into consideration the valid grounds and in the wake of application (Annexure P-3) forwarded by the public prosecutor, the Special Judge extended the period for submission of the final police report (challan) beyond the statutory period of 180 days, by means of order dated 07.02.2013. In that eventuality, the public prosecutor would be deemed and presumed to have applied his mind and considered the cogent grounds for extension and then forwarded the same to the Special Court. Otherwise, in the absence of cogent grounds for extension, he (PP) ought to have returned the application back to the SHO. Therefore, it cannot possibly be saith that the extension of statutory period to submit the final police report was illegal, as contrary urged on his behalf. It is not a matter of dispute that since the prosecution has submitted the final police report (challan), within the extended statutory period in Court, so, the petitioner is not entitled to the concession of regular bail, in the obtaining circumstances of the case.

No other legal point, worth consideration, has either been urged or pressed by the learned counsel for the parties. In the light of aforesaid reasons and without commenting further anything on merits, lest it may prejudice the case of either side during the course of the trial of the main case, as there is no merit, therefore, the instant petition for regular bail filed by the petitioner is hereby dismissed as such.