PARAMJEET SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a first petition under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR no.25 dtd. 28/3/2021 registered under Sec. 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, Act, 1985 (in short "NDPS Act") (Sec. 29 of the NDPS Act has been added later on) at Police Station Lakhoke Behram, District Ferozepur.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and has been picked up from his house. It is further submitted that a perusal of the FIR (Annexure P-1) would show that the same was registered at the instance of Shimla Rani, Incharge, CIA Staff who stated that she, along with other police officials including Sukhjant Singh, were patrolling when an informer had informed them that the present petitioner was carrying intoxicant tablets and accordingly on 28/3/2021, the petitioner was apprehended at village Chakh Megha. It is also submitted that a perusal of the vernacular of the FIR would show that the ruqa had been sent at 05:30 PM and the said ruqa was typed but in the FIR there was no mention of the fact that the police party was carrying a printer or laptop. It is stated that when the matter came up before a coordinate Bench of this Court on 15/12/2021, the following order was passed:-

(3.) It is also stated that in pursuance of said order, the State has filed a short affidavit in which the call details of various persons who were members of the police party, who had got the alleged recovery effected, has been detailed. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to Annexure R-1, which are the call details of SI Shimla Rani, CIA staff as per which, at 17:54:02 on 28/3/2021, she was at Golu ka Mour, which is at a distance of 15 kilometers from the place of incident. Reference has also been made to Annexure R-6, which are the call details of Sukhjant Singh as per which at the said time, i.e. 17:59:01(05:59 PM), the said police official was at village Lalchian and it is thus, submitted that even the police party was not at the same place, at the time when the alleged recovery had been effected. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 28/3/2021 and challan in the present case has already been presented and there are 13 prosecution witnesses and none of them have been examined, thus the trial is likely to take time. It is also submitted that the petitioner is not involved in any other case.