Are you looking for a legal research tool ?
Get Started
Do check other products like LIBIL, a legal due diligence tool to get a litigation check report and Case Management tool to monitor and collaborate on cases.

Tarandeep Singh @ Bittu And Sunil Kumar v. State Of Punjab

Tarandeep Singh @ Bittu And Sunil Kumar v. State Of Punjab

(High Court Of Punjab And Haryana)

| 17-09-2010

Ajai Lamba, J.

1. This shall dispose of two petitions viz. Criminal Miscellaneous No. M-5645 of 2010 titled Tarandeep Singh @ Bittu v. State of Punjab and Criminal Miscellaneous No. M-12193 of 2010 titled Sunil Kumar v. State of Punjab as both arise out of common FIR.

2. The petitions have been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail in case FIR No. 121 dated 27.3.2009 under Sections 18 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, registered with Police Station, Sadar, Patiala.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner(s) contends that although recovery of 5 kgs of opium has been effected from the petitioners in the two petitions, however, the chemical content has been found to be only 3.3% in 10 grams which would constitute total quantity of the offending chemical to be 160 grams i.e. non-commercial quantity and therefore the petitioners would be entitled to concession of bail in view of 2008 (2) RCR (Cri.) 597 E. Micheal Raj v. Intelligence Officer, Narcotic Control Bureau.

4. I have also taken note of the fact that there have been serious allegations against Sarabjeet Singh, Sub Inspector, in relation to possible false implication in a case under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and in another case in regard to allegation of false implication in a dispute between private parties for taking possession of shops. Relevant portion of the enquiry report is extracted hereunder:

6. The allegations levelled by the accused in Para No. 6 of the writ regarding the failure of the sample in case FIR No. 131 dated 2.9.2009 Under Section 21/61/85 NDPS Act, P.S. Julkan are found true. The sample was failed on 10.9.2009 and due to this a cancellation report was filed on 5.12.2009. A departmental enquiry has been initiated against SI Sarabjeet Singh.

7. The allegations levelled by the accused in Para No. 7 of the writ regarding FIR No. 186 dated 14.12.2009 Under Section 447/427/120B/148/149 IPC, PS Julkan. On enquiry, it was found that this case was registered on the complaint of one Gurpal Singh S/o Parkash Singh R/o Village Dundi Majra. There was a dispute of shops between two parties and the complainant party had alleged the connivance of SI Sarabjeet Singh with the other party for letting them to take the possession of the shops. On this complaint, the enquiry was conducted by SP(D), Patiala, who had indicted SI Sarabjeet Singh as one of the accused Under Section 120B IPC. SI Sarabjeet Singh was arrested in this case on 22.3.2010 and the case is under investigation. Besides this, another departmental enquiry is being initiated against SI Sarabjeet Singh.

5. Without commenting on the merits of the case, the petitions are allowed.

6. Bail to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

Advocate List
Bench
  • HON'BLE JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA
  • J.
Eq Citations
  • LQ/PunjHC/2010/3741
Head Note

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — S. 439 — Bail — Entitlement to — Petitioners arrested under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Recovery of 5 kgs of opium from petitioners — Chemical content found to be only 3.3% in 10 grams which would constitute total quantity of offending chemical to be 160 grams i.e. non-commercial quantity — Serious allegations against Sub Inspector in relation to possible false implication in a case under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and in another case in regard to allegation of false implication in a dispute between private parties for taking possession of shops — Petitioners entitled to concession of bail — Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — S. 18 — Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S. 439 (Para 3)