Sukhpal Singh @ Kala vs State of Punjab

M.M. Singh Bedi, J.—Petitioner seeks the concession of regular bail in a case of recovery of 570 grams of intoxicating powder, under the provisions of Section 167(2) Cr.P.C.

The petitioner was arrested on 27.9.2013 and the period of 180 days expired on 26.3.2014. The petitioner moved an application u/s 167(2) Cr.P.C. on 27.3.2014. But prior to the said application, the prosecution had moved an application on 7.3.2014 seeking extension of time, u/s 36A(4) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

A perusal of police record indicates that the application for extension of time was filed by the Additional Public Prosecutor by forwarding the request of Investigating Officer, by observing as follows:

Forwarded with comments that I have perused the file and request filed and found that the investigation is still incomplete in this case and report of Chemical Examiner is not received so far despite efforts. Extension of time for investigation is required please. Sd/- APP 7.3.2014.

The trial Court appears to have extended the time on 28.3.2014 while dismissing the application of the petitioner.

The provision of Section 36A(4) of the NDPS Act came up for consideration before Hon''ble the Supreme Court in the case of Sanjay Kumar Kedia @ Sanjay Kedia Vs. Intelligence Officer, Narcotic Control Bureau and Another, , wherein it has been laid down that NDPS Act authorizes extension of period of detention provided stringent conditions mentioned in Section 36A(4) are complied with. The said conditions are:-

i. The application should be accompanied by a report of the Public Prosecutor;

ii. The said report should indicate the progress of the investigation;

iii. The report should specify the compelling reasons for seeking detention of the accused beyond the period of 180 days; and

iv. The application should be decided after giving notice to the accused.

In the present case, the report of the Public Prosecutor stating the compelling reasons for seeking detention of the petitioner beyond the period of 180 days, is not specific in the manner required by the statute.

As per the judgment delivered in the case of Sanjay Kumar Kedia @ Sanjay Kedia (supra), the petitioner can be granted the concession of bail on account of indefeasible right accrued to him despite the application u/s 36A(4) of the NDPS Act having been filed by the prosecution.

In view of the above circumstance, the application dated 7.3.2014 will not defeat the right of the petitioner to be released on bail u/s 167(2) Cr.P.C. The present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bonds/surety to the satisfaction of the trial Court.