Pritam Singh @ Peeta vs State Of Punjab

Jaishree Thakur, J

The instant petition has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.185 dated 13.10.2017 under

Section 22 of the NDPS Act, 1985 registered at Police Station Mehatpur, District Jalandhar (Rural).

Counsel for the petitioner inter alia would contend that the alleged recovery effected from the petitioner is marginally higher than the non-commercial

quantity. It is alleged that 110 grams intoxicant substance has been recovered from him, which is inclusive of the polythene bag, apart from arguing

that the FIR itself would reflect that the police party was in private vehicle, which is in direct violation of the directions issued by the Government of

Punjab regarding not using private vehicles in NDPS cases. In order to buttress his argument, he relies upon the decision rendered by this High Court

in Balbir Kaur @ Beero vs. State of Punjab passed in CRM-M No.44907 of 2017 decided on 11.09.2018.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-State opposes the bail application by submitting that the petitioner herein is a habitual offender,

however, he is not in a position to controvert the fact that the search party was in private vehicle as has been reflected in the FIR itself.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the paper book.

Keeping in view the fact that alleged recovery of the contraband is marginally higher than the non-commercial quantity and that there is a

contravention to the directions issued by the Government of Punjab for not using private vehicle for patrolling, coupled with the fact that the trial is

likely to take some time to conclude, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the petitioner behind the bars. The instant petition is allowed and

the petitioner is directed to be released on regular bail on execution of adequate personal/ surety bond to the satisfaction of concerned trial Court/Duty

Magistrate. However, any observation made herein shall not be construed to be an expression on merits of the case.