Pankaj vs State Of Haryana

Vivek Puri, J

The matter has been taken up through video-conferencing due to COVID-19 pandemic.

By this petition, the petitioner is seeking regular bail in case bearing FIR No. 106 dated 11.04.2021 registered under Section 21 of the Narcotics Drugs

and Psychotropic Substances Act (for short the 'NDPS Act') and Section 14A of the Foreigners Act, 1946 at Police Station Safidon, District Jind.

As per the allegations of prosecution, on 11.04.2021, the petitioner was driving the motorcycle and co-accused,namely, Bindra @ Vikas was sitting on

the pillion. No incriminating articles were recovered from the possession of the petitioner. However, 44 grams of heroin was recovered from the

possession of the co-accused, namely, Bindra @ Vikas.

It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that no contraband has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner, the quantity

of contraband, alleged to have been recovered from the possession of the co-accused, even falls in the category of less than commercial 1 of 2

quantity. He further states that the petitioner is not involved in any other case. The FIR was initially registered under Section 21 of the NDPS Act

only, there is nothing to suggest violation of any of the provision of Foreigners Act. The petitioner is resident of State of Haryana. The investigation of

the case is complete and challan has already been presented in the Court.

Learned State counsel, on instruction from Inspector Sanjay Kumar, has not assailed the aforesaid facts, but has opposed the bail application on the

score that the offences under the NDPS Act cannot be viewed lightly.

It is significant to note that no contraband has been recovered from the petitioner. The quantity of contraband recovered from the possession of the

co-accused falls in the category of less than commercial quantity. There is nothing to suggest violation of any provision of Foreigners Act. The

investigation of the case is complete, challan has already been presented in the Court and the conclusion of trial is likely to take some time on account

of restricted hearing of the Courts due of Covid- 19 Pandemic. As such, no fruitful purpose will be served by detaining the petitioner in further

custody.

In these circumstances, sufficient grounds are made out to extend the concession of bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, without making any expression

on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, subject to his furnishing bail bonds/surety

bonds to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate/Trial Court.