High Courts

Bikkar Singh vs State of Punjab

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 3 July 1996 · Citation: (1997) 1 RCR(Criminal) 572

HON’BLE JUDGES
M.L.Koul, J
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 8222-M of 1996
Ask AI about this case

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

5 paragraphs · 409 words

M.L. Koul, J.

1.

Bail is sought by the petitioner Bikkar Singh during the trial of the case in F.I.R. No. 25 dated 28.3.1996 P.S. City Kotkapura under Section 15/61/85 of the N.D.P.S. Act. For grant of bail various legalities of the case with regard to the recovery of 41 Kgs of poppy husk has been challenged and the petitioner has contended that he is innocent and has not committed any crime.

2.

In the present case the petitioner has been arrested as far back as 28.3.1996 and since then he is languishing in the jail. Objections filed by the State have been considered and they have reiterated the merits of the case as is narrated in the F.I.R. No material has been brought in the Court other than what is alleged already in the case. It is submitted by the learned A.A.G. Punjab at the bar that the accused has been chargesheeted by a competent Court of law and now the case is fixed for recording of prosecution evidence.

3.

I had a look over the matter and prima facie it is found that most of the witnesses to be examined by the prosecution are police personnel and, therefore, there is no danger that the witnesses can be tampered with by the accused or they can be won over. There is no evidence available on the record of the case to show that the accused is a previous convict or his social status is not above board which needs that he should not be let out on bail and his release on bail would spoil the atmosphere of the area. Only 41 Kgs. of poppy husk have been recovered from the accused. Various legalities of the case have to be taken care of by the trial Court during the trial of the case. Hence without discussing the merits of the case, I feel that it is a fit case where bail can be granted to the accused with a direction that while on bail he shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of the trial Court and in case he is in possession of any passport he would surrender the same before the territorial Superintendent of the Police of the district to which he belongs.

4.

The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the amount of Rs. 30,000/ with one surety and personal recognition bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.