AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
46 paragraphs · 602 wordsGurvinder Singh Gill, J
The petitioner has approached this Court seeking grant of regular bail in respect of a case registered against him vide FIR No.122 dated 19.11.2019 at Police Station Divison No.4, Ludhiana, under Section 21, 61, 85 of the NDPS Act.
The allegations, in nutshell, are to the effect that pursuant to receipt of a secret information, the petitioner alongwith one Shubham Kumar @ Bump was found in possession of 400 grams of ‘Heroin’ while travelling in a Swift car bearing registration No.PB-10-BV-5773.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner came to be involved falsely in the present case. It has further been submitted that the petitioner has been behind bars for a substantial period of more than 3 years & 2 months and that since the trial is proceeding at snail’s pace, the petitioner deserves the concession of regular bail.
On the other hand, learned State counsel has submitted that since the petitioner alongwith Shubham Kumar was caught red handed while travelling in a car and a huge quantity of contraband was recovered from the said car, he does not deserve the concession of bail. Learned State counsel has, however, informed that the petitioner has been behind bars since the last about 3 years, 2 months & 24 days. Learned State counsel has also informed that the petitioner stands involved in 2 more cases registered under the Prisons Act. It has also been informed that as on date only 2 PWs out of cited 15 PWs have been examined.
This Court has considered rival submissions.
Since the petitioner seeks grant of bail mainly on account of long custody, it is apposite to refer to a few judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court in this regard wherein Hon’ble Supreme Court has granted the concession of bail solely on ground of long custody:
Case No.
Date of Decision
Title of case
Period which the accused had undergone when granted bail by Hon’ble Supreme Court
Criminal Appeal No.245/2020
07.02.2020
Chitta Biswas @ Subhas Vs. The State of West Bengal
1 year & 7 months
Criminal Appeal No.668/2020
12.10.2020
Amit Singh Moni Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh
2 years & 7 months
Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No.5769/2022
01.08.2022
Nitish Adhikary @ Bapan Vs. The State of West Bengal
1 year & 7 months
Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No.4173/2022
04.08.2022
Shariful Islam @ Sarif Vs. The State of West Bengal
1 year & 6 months
Criminal Appeal No.1169/2022
05.08.2022
Gopal Krishna Patra @ Gopalrusma Vs. Union of India
2 years, 1 month & 17 days
Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No.5530/2022
22.08.2022
Mohammad Salman Hanif Shaikh Vs. The State of Gujarat
About 2 years
Criminal Appeal No.2027-2022
22.11.2022
Karnail Singh Vs. The State of Odisha
1 year & 8 months
Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No.8653-2022
25.11.2022
Karim Adaldar Vs. The State of West Bengal
10 months
Keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case particularly the long custody of the petitioner and the fact that only 2 PWs out of cited 15 PWs have been examined till date, the petition merits acceptance and is hereby accepted.
The petition, as such, is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned.
It is, however, directed that in case the petitioner is found to be indulging in similar offence again, the prosecution would be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of bail before this Court.