Delay in Test Identification & Absence of Motive Fatal to Prosecution: Allahabad High Court Acquits Man for Murder Tokre Koli or Dhor Koli – Both Stand on Same Legal Footing: Bombay High Court Slams Scrutiny Committee for Disregarding Pre-Constitutional Records Consent Is No Defence When Victim Is Under 16: Delhi High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Granting Pre-Arrest Bail in Minor Rape Cases Would Send a Harmful Societal Signal: Delhi High Court Refuses Anticipatory Bail to Accused Citing POCSO’s Rigorous Standards Void Marriage No Shield Against Cruelty Charges: Karnataka High Court Affirms Section 498A Applies Even In Deceptive and Void Marital Relationships Consolidation Authorities Cannot Confer Ownership Or Alter Scheme Post Confirmation Without Due Process: Punjab & Haryana High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Jurisdiction Over Void Post-Scheme Orders Litigation Policy is Not Law, Can’t Enforce Guidelines Through Courts: Rajasthan High Court Refuses to Entertain Quo Warranto Against Additional Advocate General’s Appointment Police and Lawyers Are Two Limbs of Justice System: Rajasthan High Court Takes Suo Motu Cognizance in Police Misconduct Incident Sole Testimony, Forensic Gaps, and Withheld Witness: No Conviction Possible: Delhi High Court Affirms Acquittal in Murder Trial Remand Keeps the Dispute Alive – Not Arrears: Bombay High Court Holds SVLDRS Relief Must Be Computed Under Litigation Category Daughter’s Right Extinguished When Partition Effected Prior to 2005 Amendment: Madras High Court Trial Courts Cannot Direct Filing of Challan After Conviction — Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Directions Against DSP Veer Singh Rule 4 Creates Parity, Not a Parallel Pension Pipeline: Rajasthan High Court Denies Dual Pension to Ex-Chief Justice Serving as SHRC Chairperson Right to Be Heard Must Be Preserved Where Claim Has a Legal Basis: Orissa High Court Upholds Impleadment of Will Beneficiary in Partition Suit Long-Term Ad Hocism Is Exploitation, Not Employment: Orissa High Court Orders Regularization Of Junior Typist After 25 Years Of Service PIL Cannot Be a Tool for Personal Grievances: Supreme Court Upholds Municipal Body’s Power to Revise Property Tax After 16 Years Omission of Accused’s Name by Eyewitness in FIR is a Fatal Lacuna: Supreme Court Acquits Man Convicted of Murder Correction In Revenue Map Under Section 30 Isn’t A Tool To Shift Plot Location After 17 Years: Supreme Court Quashes High Court’s Remand Casteist Abuses Must Be In Public View: Supreme Court Quashes SC/ST Act Proceedings Where Alleged Insults Occurred Inside Complainant’s House Resignation Bars Pension, But Not Gratuity: Supreme Court Draws Sharp Line Between Voluntary Retirement and Resignation in DTC Employee Case

Punjab and Haryana High Court Grants Bail to First-Time Offender in NDPS Act Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court granted bail to a first-time offender under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985. The decision was rendered by Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi in the case of Rajdeep Singh vs. State of Punjab, CRM-M-23627 of 2023.

The petitioner, Rajdeep Singh, had filed a petition seeking regular bail in a case registered under Sections 22/61/85 of the NDPS Act. It was alleged that the petitioner was apprehended with 500 bottles of Siorex Syrup during a routine vehicle check at a barricade near Pristine Mall, Khanna. The bottles were found in a Swift car, and the petitioner claimed that he was merely transporting them from a licensed seller to a licensed purchaser. To support this claim, a valid bill was produced.

During the hearing, the petitioner's counsel argued that the petitioner was a first-time offender and had already been in custody for two years. They further emphasized that none of the 14 prosecution witnesses had been examined thus far. Citing a Supreme Court judgment in the case of Nitish Adhikary @ Bapan vs. The State of West Bengal and a previous decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Balraj Singh vs. State of Punjab, the petitioner's counsel contended that these precedents supported the grant of bail in such circumstances.

The state counsel acknowledged that the petitioner had been in custody for two years and was a first-time offender. However, they argued that the bill produced by the petitioner was found to be fictitious during collateral proceedings related to an anticipatory bail petition filed by a co-accused.

After considering the arguments from both sides, Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi referred to the aforementioned Supreme Court judgment and the earlier decision of the High Court. The court noted that the petitioner had been in custody for a substantial period, the prosecution witnesses had not been examined, and the petitioner had no criminal antecedents under the NDPS Act. Based on these factors, the court held that the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act could be diluted to some extent, considering the petitioner's right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

Consequently, the court allowed the petition and ordered the release of Rajdeep Singh on bail. The petitioner was required to furnish bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate. Additionally, certain conditions were imposed, including monthly appearances before the concerned police station and the deposit of a Fixed Deposit Receipt (FDR) worth Rs. 50,000. The FDR would be forfeited in case of the petitioner's absence from trial without sufficient cause.

Punjab and Haryana High Court's decision to grant bail to the first-time offender, Rajdeep Singh, in the NDPS Act case reflects a consideration of various factors such as the period of custody, non-examination of prosecution witnesses, and the petitioner's clean record. The judgment demonstrates the court's approach in balancing the right to a speedy trial with the grant of bail in appropriate circumstances.

Decided on: 17.05.2023

Rajdeep Singh vs State of Punjab

Latest Legal News