GURDAS SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is the third bail application for the grant of regular bail under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C in case bearing FIR No.0130 dtd. 27/4/2020 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sec. 22 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Sec. 188 IPC, 1860 and Sec. 51(b) of the Disaster Management Act, 2005 at Police Station Sadar Fazilka, District Fazilka.

(2.) Bereft of unnecessary details, the allegations, as levelled in the FIR, are that on 27/4/2020, ASI Bhagat Singh received a secret information that one Gurdas Singh-petitioner had been indulging in the sale of intoxicant tablets and on that day, he along with one more person, was coming to Fazilka in the Car bearing registration No.PB-30X-9121 to sell the drugs. A Naka was installed but when the car came there and was signalled to stop, a stray animal came onto the road because of which the car overturned. The occupants of the car were taken to the Hospital. The police party reached at the spot and 2000 tablets Clovidol-100SR were recovered from the accidented vehicle.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the contraband was not recovered from his conscious possession. There has been violation of Sec. 42 of the NDPS Act. No independent witness was associated at the time of recovery. As per the Investigating Officer, the recovered medicines pertained to Batch No.TVD-19688, whereas, the recovery memo stated the Batch No.TVD-19685. The batch number of the tablets had not been mentioned in the Form M-29 and there were various discrepancies in the Inventory Report prepared (Annexure P-7). He contended that the petitioner had been in custody since the last 1 ½ years and the co- accused of the petitioner had been granted the concession of bail by this Court vide order dtd. 1/6/2022 (Annexure P-8). It was lastly, contended that there was change in circumstances after the last dismissal of the bail application on 30/5/2022 inasmuch as the statement of PW1-I.O. Harbans Singh had been recorded whose cross-examination revealed discrepancies, inconsistencies and variations. Reliance is placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner on the judgments in (i) Union of India Versus K.A Najeeb, 2021(2) R.C.R. (Criminal) 145, (ii) Ghanso @ Kalo Versus State of Punjab, CRM-M-20629-2022 decided on 31/5/2022, (iii) Sukhwant Singh Versus State of Haryana, 2022(1) R.C.R. (Criminal) 233 and (iv) Gourav Doomra Versus State of Punjab, 2020(4) Law Herald 2785.