High CourtsSingle Bench

Surjit Kaur vs State Of Punjab

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 7 January 2022 · Citation: (2022) 01 P&H CK 0026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anupinder Singh Grewal, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 304 · Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Section 21
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Petition (M) No. 27746 Of 2021 (O& 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

21 paragraphs · 387 words

Anupinder Singh Grewal, J

Case taken up through video conferencing.

The petitioner is seeking regular bail in FIR No.130 dated 20.05.2021, under Sections 304 and 34 IPC and Section 21 of the NDPS Act added lateron,

registered at Police Station Samana, District Patiala.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the deceased had admittedly died due to drug overdose. His body was found at 'katcha' path on

15.05.2021. The father of the deceased had stated that his son had died due to drug overdose and he does not suspect anyone. The FIR has been

lodged by the complainant, who is the cousin of the deceased, after about 05 days wherein it is stated that the petitioner and co-accused had

administered drug overdose to the deceased. She further contends that only 05 grams of heroin is stated to be recovered from the petitioner which is

much below the threshold of small quantity. She also contends that the petitioner is an elected Panch of the village and has been falsely implicated.

She was also implicated in other cases and she is on bail in those cases. The petitioner is in custody for over 07 months in the instant case

Learned State counsel states that charges have been framed but no prosecution witness has been examined. She also contends that the petitioner is

also involved in other cases under the NDPS Act.

Learned counsel for the complainant states that in view of the serious allegation against the petitioner, she is not entitled to the concession of regular

bail.

Heard.

In view of the above, especially when the petitioner, who is a lady, is in custody for over 07 months, Covid 19 pandemic and the conclusion of the trial

is likely to take some time, I deem it a fit case to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner.

Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on

her furnishing requisite bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.

At the time of release of the petitioner, the SHO, Women Police Station, Patiala shall be informed and the petitioner shall furnish her mobile number to

her and keep the location of her phone on till the conclusion of the trial.