High CourtsSingle Bench

Sukhpreet Singh Alias Preet vs State Of Punjab

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 1 July 2021 · Citation: (2021) 07 P&H CK 0004

HON’BLE JUDGES
Harnaresh Singh Gill, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Section 22(b), 29
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Petition (M) No. 23779 Of 2021
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

16 paragraphs · 283 words

Harnaresh Singh Gill, J

Through this petition, the petitioner seeks regular bail in case bearing FIR No.295 dated 12.11.2020, registered at Police Station Gidderbaha, District

Sri Muktsar Sahib, under Sections 22(b) and 29 (added vide G.D. No.53 dated 13.11.2020 ) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psyshotropic Substances Act,

1985.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that no recovery was effected from the petitioner; that the petitioner was merely a pillion rider on a motor-

cycle being driven by co-accused, Jaskran Singh, and that the recovery of intoxicant tablets allegedly effected from a polythene bag hanging on the

handle of the motor-cycle, is marginally higher than the commercial quantity. The petitioner has been in custody since 10.05.2021.

On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer made in the present petition. However, he does not dispute the fact that the recovery

effected in the present case is marginally higher than the commercial quantity. There is no other case registered or pending against the petitioner, at

least of a similar nature.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

The recovery allegedly effected in the present case is marginally higher than the commercial quantity, as noticed above. The petitioner has been in

custody since 10.05.2021. Trial of the case would take time to conclude, especially due to Covid-19. Therefore, no useful purpose would be served by

keeping the petitioner behind the bars.

In view of the above, without commenting anything on the merits, lest it should prejudice the case of either side, the present petition is allowed and the

petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate.