High CourtsSingle Bench

Gulshan Kumar vs State of Haryana

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 13 February 2012 · Citation: (2012) 02 P&H CK 0134

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ram Chand Gupta, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 439 · Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS) — Section 15, 25, 37
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal M. No. M-4088 of 2012 (O and M)
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

10 paragraphs · 285 words

Hon''ble Mr.Justice Ram Chand Gupta

Crl. M. No. 8700 of 2012

Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions.

Crl. M. No. M-4088 of 2012

1.

The present petition filed u/s 439 Cr.P.C. is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.117, dated 11.2.2011, under Sections 15 and 25 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short `the Act'') and u/s 25 of the Arms Act, registered at Police Station Sadar, Hisar.

2.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the whole record carefully including the impugned order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hisar, dismissing application for bail filed by petitioner.

3.

Briefly stated, allegations against petitioner-accused are that on 11.2.2011, a vehicle was apprehended by the police party, which was being driven by present petitioner-accused. On search of aforesaid vehicle, four bags of plastic containing poppy straw weighing 156 kg were recovered. A country made pistol of 38 bore alongwith five live cartridges was also recovered from the possession of petitioner-accused.

4.

It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner-accused that petitioner has been continuing in custody since 11.2.2011 and that only one witness has been examined so far and that trial is not likely to be concluded in near future.

5.

However, recovery effected from the petitioner-accused is commercial quantity of narcotic drug. Hence, in view of rigor of Section 37 of the Act, he is not entitled for relief of bail.

6.

In view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition filed by petitioner-Gulshan Kumar for grant of regular bail is dismissed being devoid of any merit.