High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

Vinod Padikal And Another vs State Of Punjab on 18 September, 2009

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Vinod Padikal And Another vs State Of Punjab on 18 September, 2009
Criminal Misc. No. M-16029 of 2009 (O&M)                       -1

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                   AT CHANDIGARH
                         ****
                            Criminal Misc. No. M-16029 of 2009 (O&M)
                                     Date of Decision:18.09.2009

Vinod Padikal and another
                                                         .....Petitioners
            Vs.

State of Punjab
                                                         .....Respondent


CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARBANS LAL

Present:-   Mr. Kunal Siag, Advocate for the petitioners.

            Mr. Arshvinder Singh, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.
                         ****
HARBANS LAL, J.

This petition has been moved by Vinod Padikal as well as

Parmod Kumar under Section 439 of Cr.P.C seeking their regular bail in

case FIR No.5 dated 3.3.2009 registered under Sections 21/25/29/61/85 of

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for brevity, `the

Act’) at Police Station S/SNC/PB, Amritsar.

The facts in brief are that on 3.3.2009, on the information of

special informer, the Investigating Officer along with co-officials after

arresting and effecting the recovery of 2 Kg. of heroin from the possession

of accused Nirvair Singh and Harchand Singh alias Jhanda Singh in the

presence and on the instructions of PPS/DSP/SNC/PB/ASR got registered

the above said (present) case. During the investigation, the accused

disclosed that above said heroin was to be handed over to the above said

accused (referring to the petitioners). On 10.3.2009, on the information of

special informer, the petitioners were arrested and produced in the Court.

Criminal Misc. No. M-16029 of 2009 (O&M) -2

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties, besides

perusing the record with due care and circumspection.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted with a good

deal of force that the petitioners had been taken up from the Bus Stand of

Amritsar where they were waiting for the bus to go to Jammu for their

business purposes. He further puts that no recovery has been effected from

these petitioners, and that being so, they may be admitted to bail.

As against this, the learned State Counsel maintained that as a

matter of fact, the petitioners are the smugglers. Nirvair Singh and

Harchand Singh alias Jhanda Singh were to hand over the heroin recovered

from their possession to the petitioners.

I have well considered the rival contentions. It is the specific

case of the prosecution that Nirvair Singh and Harchand Singh alias Jhanda

Singh had suffered a disclosure statement in the terms that the recovered

heroin was to be handed over by them to the petitioners. If the petitioners

are admitted to bail, they may abscond or tamper with the prosecution

evidence. Thus, keeping in view the seriousness of allegations, I do not

deem it a fit case to admit bail to the petitioners. Consequently, the present

petition is dismissed.

September 18, 2009                                 ( HARBANS LAL )
renu                                                    JUDGE