CRM M-49151 343 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT Dharminder Singh State of CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Present : HARKESH MANUJA, of Cr.P.C., petitioner in case bearing FIR No. Sections Station Samrala, District Ludhiana implicated 2. DSP, Samrala, Police District Khanna, District Ludhiana along with custody certificate has been filed in Court today. The same is taken on record. Regis 3. investigation already stands concluded with the filing of challan; the petitioner is in custody for the last trial is likely to take some time to conclude as out of total prosecution witnesses, only 0 deserves the concession of bail. 4. petitioner has been opposed by 49151-2024 (O&M) [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM M Date of Decision: Dharminder Singh VERSUS State of Punjab CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Present : Mr. Lavnaya Gupta, Advocate Mr. Rohit Bansal, Sr. DAG, Punjab. **** HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) By way of present second of Cr.P.C., prayer has been made for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No. Sections 15, 18, 25, 29 of NDPS Act, 1985, Samrala, District Ludhiana, whereby the petitioner has been implicated with the allegation of recovery of Status report by way of affidavit of Sh.Tarlochan Singh, DSP, Samrala, Police District Khanna, District Ludhiana along with custody certificate has been filed in Court today. The same is taken on record. Registry to tag the same at appropriate place. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the investigation already stands concluded with the filing of challan; the petitioner is in custody for the last more than trial is likely to take some time to conclude as out of total prosecution witnesses, only 03 have been examined and deserves the concession of bail. On the other hand, the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner has been opposed by learned State counsel IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RM M-49151-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 28.01.2025 ...Petitioner ...Respondent HARKESH MANUJA Mr. Lavnaya Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner. Rohit Bansal, Sr. DAG, Punjab. second petition filed under Section 439 has been made for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.120 dated 12.06.2023 under 15, 18, 25, 29 of NDPS Act, 1985, registered at Police , whereby the petitioner has been the allegation of recovery of 03 kg opium. Status report by way of affidavit of Sh.Tarlochan Singh, DSP, Samrala, Police District Khanna, District Ludhiana along with custody certificate has been filed in Court today. The same is taken try to tag the same at appropriate place. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the investigation already stands concluded with the filing of challan; the more than 01 year and 07 months; trial is likely to take some time to conclude as out of total 3 have been examined and thus he he prayer made on behalf of the learned State counsel while referring 439 has been made for grant of regular bail to the under registered at Police , whereby the petitioner has been Status report by way of affidavit of Sh.Tarlochan Singh, DSP, Samrala, Police District Khanna, District Ludhiana along with custody certificate has been filed in Court today. The same is taken Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the investigation already stands concluded with the filing of challan; the months; trial is likely to take some time to conclude as out of total 19 thus he he prayer made on behalf of the while referring SANJAY GUPTA 2025.01.29 10:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRM M-49151 to the antecedents of the petitioner having involved in of NDPS Act though but was convicted and bail. 5. through the paper book. I find substance in the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. 6. concluded with the and out of The petitioner is in custody for the last about 01 year 10 days, in such circumstances, c likely to take some time, incarceration of the petitioner 7. of the case, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, subject to h bonds/ surety bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court/Duty Magistrate. 8. stand disposed of. 28.01.2025 sanjay 49151-2024 (O&M) [2] to the antecedents of the petitioner having involved in of NDPS Act though relating to recovery of but was convicted and thus he does not deserve the concession of I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper book. I find substance in the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. In the present case, investigation already stands concluded with the filing of challan, followe and out of 19 prosecution witnesses, only 0 The petitioner is in custody for the last about 01 year , in such circumstances, considering likely to take some time, I do not find any incarceration of the petitioner. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, subject to h surety bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court/Duty Magistrate. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. .01.2025 ( Whether speaking/reasoned ? Whether Reportable ? to the antecedents of the petitioner having involved in one more case relating to recovery of non-commercial quantity thus he does not deserve the concession of have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper book. I find substance in the submissions made by In the present case, investigation already stands filing of challan, followed by framing of charges prosecution witnesses, only 03 have been examined The petitioner is in custody for the last about 01 year, 07 months and onsidering the fact that the trial is I do not find any justification to extend the Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, subject to his furnishing adequate bail surety bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned ? Yes/No Yes/No one more case quantity, thus he does not deserve the concession of have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper book. I find substance in the submissions made by In the present case, investigation already stands d by framing of charges have been examined. 7 months and the fact that the trial is justification to extend the Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is furnishing adequate bail surety bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also SANJAY GUPTA 2025.01.29 10:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document