Gurjant Singh v. State of Punjab

ANOOP CHITKARA, J. FIR No. Dated Police Sta1on Sec1ons 66 11.09.2024 Sarai Amant Khan, 21(b), 29, 61, 85 of NDPS Act Tarn Taran

¶1The pettoner apprehending arrest in the FIR captoned above has come up before this Court under Secton 482 of Bharatya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS], seeking antcipatory bail.

¶2Vide order dated 26.11.2024, the pettoner was granted interim bail, which is contnuing tll date.

¶3In paragraph 18 of the bail petton, the accused declares that he has no criminal antecedents.

¶4The facts and allegatons are taken from the reply filed by the State. On

11.09.2024, based on chance recovery, the Police seized 41 grams heroin from the possession of co-accused, namely, Satnam Singh @ Sa@a Chaudhary. The Investgator claims to have complied with all the statutory requirements of the NDPS Act, 1985, and BNSS, 2023.

¶5The pettoner's counsel argued that the pettoner was not named in the FIR and has been nominated on the basis of disclosure statement of co-accused. He submits that except the alleged disclosure statement, there is no direct link to connect the pettoner order/judgment. 1

¶6The pettoner's counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent conditons. The pettoner's counsel argued that the custodial investgaton would serve no purpose whatsoever and the pre-trial incarceraton would cause an irreversible injustce to the pettoner and family.

¶7The State's counsel opposes bail and refers to the reply. It would be appropriate to refer paragraphs 11 and 12 of the reply, which reads as follows: "ROLE OF THE PETITIONER:

¶11That as far as the role of the pettoner is concerned, it is submited that the pettoner is indulged in the smuggling of heroin and the recovery of heroin affected from the co-accused also belongs to the pettoner as the same has been disclosed by the co-accused Satnam Singh @ Sata Chaudhary at the tme of his arrest. As such, the pettoner is certainly not enttled for the concession of antcipatory bail and the custodial interrogaton of the pettoner is utmost required in the present case in order to trace the sources of the pettoner and further to bring the investgaton of the present case to its logical conclusion. EVIDENCE AGAINST THE PETITIONER:

¶12That as far as evidence against the pettoner is concerned, it is submited that the co-accused Satnam Singh alias Sata Chaudhary has voluntarily disclosed before the investgatng officer that he has purchased heroin for several tmes from the pettoner Gurjant Singh. As such, the pettoner has commited the serious offence and he is certainly not enttled for antcipatory bail."

¶8An analysis of the above would lead to the following outcome. REASONING:

¶9The quantty involved is 41 grams of heroin, which is primafacie less than commercial. Given this, the rigors of S. 37 of the NDPS Act do not apply in the present case.

¶10Secton 2 (vii-a) of the NDPS Act defines commercial quantty as the quantty greater than the quantty specified in the schedule. Secton 2 (xxiii-a) defines a small quantty as a quantty less than the quantty specified in the table of the NDPS Act. The remaining quantty falls in an undefined category, generally called an intermediate quantty. All sectons in the NDPS Act specify an offence and menton the minimum and maximum sentence, depending upon the quantty of the substance. The commercial order/judgment. 2 quantty mandates a minimum sentence of ten years of imprisonment and a minimum fine of Rupees One hundred thousand, and bail is subject to the riders mandated in S. 37 of the NDPS Act. When the quantty is less than commercial, the restrictons of Secton 37 of the NDPS Act will not a@ract, and the factors for bail become similar to the offence regular statutes.

¶11The pettoner was granted interim protecton, and during the interregnum, there is no allegaton that he had intmidated the witnesses, hampered the investgaton, or, despite being called to join the investgaton, did not appear before the investgator.

¶12The evidence might be prima facie sufficient to launch prosecuton or to frame charges, but this Court is not considering the evidence at that stage but is analyzing the same for the bail stage.

¶13Without commentng on the case's merits, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, and for the reasons mentoned above, the pettoner makes a case for bail. CONDITIONS:

¶14Given the above, there would be no justficaton to discontnue the interim protecton, which is made absolute subject to the pettoner complying with the terms of the bail order and the following additonal conditons.

¶15The pettoner is directed to join the investgaton within seven days and as and when called by the Investgator. The pettoner shall be in deemed custody for Secton 27 of the Indian Evidence Act. The pettoner shall join the investgaton as and when called by the Investgatng Officer or any Superior Officer and shall cooperate with the investgaton at all further stages as required. In the event of failure to do so, the prosecuton will be open to seeking cancellaton of the bail. During the investgaton, the pettoner shall not be subjected to third-degree, indecent language, inhuman treatment, etc.

¶16Given the background of allegatons against the pettoner, it becomes paramount to protect the witnesses, members of society and detecton staff and incapacitatng the accused would be one of the primary optons untl the filing of the closure report or discharge, or acqui@al. Consequently, it would be appropriate to restrict the possession of firearm(s). [This restricton is being imposed based on the preponderance of evidence of probability and not of evidence of certainty, i.e., beyond reasonable doubt; and as such, it is not to be construed as an intermediate sancton]. Given the nature of the allegatons and the other circumstances peculiar to this case, the pettoner shall surrender all weapons, firearms, and ammuniton, if any, along with the arms license to order/judgment. 3 the concerned authority within fiLeen days and inform the Investgator about the compliance. However, subject to the Indian Arms Act, 1959, the pettoner shall be enttled to renew and take it back in case of acqui@al, provided otherwise permissible in the concerned rules. Restrictng firearms would instll confidence in the victm(s), their families, and society; it would also restrain the accused from influencing the witnesses and repeatng the offense.

¶17This bail is condi#onal, and the founda#onal condi#on is that if the pe##oner indulges in any non-bailable offense, the State shall file an applica#on for cancella#on of this bail before the Sessions Court, which shall have the liberty to cancel this bail.

¶18The conditons mentoned above imposed by this court are to endeavor to reform and ensure the accused does not repeat the offense and also to block the menace of drug abuse. In Mohammed Zubair v. State of NCT of Delhi, 2022:INSC:735 [Para 28], Writ Petton (Criminal) No 279 of 2022, Para 29, decided on July 20, 2022, A Three-Judge bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court holds that "The bail conditons imposed by the Court must not only have a nexus to the purpose that they seek to serve but must also be proportonal to the purpose of imposing them. The courts, while imposing bail conditons must balance the liberty of the accused and the necessity of a fair trial. While doing so, conditons that would result in the deprivaton of rights and libertes must be eschewed."

¶19The concerned trial court is authorized to delete, modify, or relax any of the above conditons and shall be competent to do so in accordance with the law.

¶20Any observaton made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments.

¶21Pe11on allowed in terms mentoned above. Interim order dated 26.11.2024 is made absolute. All pending applicatons, if any, stand disposed of. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE

19.02.2025 Jyo1-II Whether reportable: No. order/judgment. 4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Reserved on: 13.02.2025 Pronounced on: 19.02.2025 Gurjant Singh ...Pettoner Versus State of Punjab …Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present: Mr. Raghav Soni, Advocate, for the pettoner. Mr. Akshay Kumar, AAG, Punjab. ****