Please Log in / Register to access the full text of this judgment and the entire database
(2020) Law Today Live Doc. Id. 15664 = 2020 L.A.R. (e-Suppl.) 2076
Decided on: 25.11.2020
(Heard through VC)
Present:
Mr. Sandeep Kumar Passi, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. Jaspreet Kaur, AAG, Punjab.
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Sections 22, 25, 29 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 -- NDPS case – Recovery of tramadol – Batch number missing in FSL report – Regular bail -- Petitioner is in custody since 09.04.2020 – Keeping in view the fact that vide order passed in Gurdev Kaur alias Gebo’s case, Law Today Live Doc. Id. 15661, the accused has been allowed regular bail in similar situation and the trial is likely to take some time to conclude as out of 13 witnesses cited, no prosecution witness has been examined, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind bars – Petition allowed.
(Para 2-5)
Cases referred:
1. Gurdev Kaur alias Gebo Vs. State of Punjab, Law Today Live Doc. Id. 15661.
***
JAISHREE THAKUR J. (ORAL) –
1. This is a petition that has been filed for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No.9 dated 09.02.2020 registered under Sections 22, 25, 29 of the NDPS Act, 1985, P.S. Lakho Ke Behram, Distt. Ferozepur (Pb.).
2. It is inter alia contended that the alleged recovery of tramadol contained a batch number, however, a perusal of the FSL report would show that no batch number of the strips was mentioned in the FSL report. Counsel for the petitioner would rely upon order dated 17.08.2020 passed in CRM-M No.22300 of 2020 titled as ''Gurdev Kaur alias Gebo Vs. State of Punjab” = Law Today Live Doc. Id. 15661 wherein in similar situation, the accused petitioner was allowed regular bail. It is further contended that the petitioner is in custody since 09.04.2020 and despite charges having been framed, no prosecution witness has been examined as on date, while also contending that 13 witnesses have been cited and therefore, the trial is not likely to conclude in near future.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-State opposes grant of regular bail to the petitioner but has not been able to controvert the factual position as stated and does not does not dispute that the petitioner is not involved in any other matter.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the paper book.
5. Keeping in view the fact that vide order dated 17.08.2020 passed in CRM-M No.22300 of 2020 titled as “Gurdev Kaur alias Gebo Vs. State of Punjab” = Law Today Live Doc. Id. 15661 the accused-petitioner has been allowed regular bail in similar situation and the trial is likely to take some time to conclude as out of 13 witnesses cited, no prosecution witness has been examined, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind 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.
Petition allowed.
********