GURJANT SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 167 (2) Cr.P.C. read with Section 439 Cr.P.C. praying for regular bail in FIR No. 146 dated 8.5.2014 registered under Section 22 -61 -85 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'the NDPS Act'), registered at Police Station, City, Tarn Taran, District Tarn Taran during the pendency of the trial.

(2.) ON the basis of the above FIR, the petitioner was arrested in the present case on 8.5.2014 and was produced before the Area Magistrate on 9.5.2014 and since then the petitioner is in judicial custody. Since the prosecution has not filed the challan after expiry of stipulated period of 180 days, which ended on 4.11.2014, an application dated 3.11.2014 was moved by the prosecution seeking extension of time for filing final report as provided under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the application was moved by the prosecution for seeking extension of time for filing the challan on the ground that the report of the chemical analysis of the sample could not be obtained from the chemical examiner. It is the case of the petitioner that the application seeking extension of time was neither accompanied by the report of the public prosecutor, which indicates the progress of the investigation nor the compelling reasons for further detaining the petitioner beyond the period of 180 days were coming forward which are the basic and essential requirements as per law. The application under Section 36 -A(4) of the NDPS Act has solely been made to defeats the rights of the petitioner of bail as provided under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. Learned trial Court on the plea of the prosecution has granted additional period for three months for filing the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. vide order dated 5.11.2014 and declined the bail application of the petitioner moved under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the Court cannot extend the time to conclude the investigation when application moved by the prosecution is not accompanied by the report of the public prosecutor and simply because report of the chemical examiner is awaited, is no ground to decline bail to the petitioner as provided under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. In support of her contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment of this court passed in Criminal Misc. No. M -3339 of 2014 titled 'Nardev Inder Singh vs. State of Punjab', Criminal Misc. No. M -309 of 2015 titled 'Lakhwinder Singh alias Seeta vs. The State of Punjab', Criminal Misc. No. M -44389 of 2014 titled 'Shunti vs. State of Punjab' and Criminal Misc. No. M -61 of 2015 titled 'Ashish Kumar @ Shally vs. State of Punjab' and Criminal Misc. No. M -44160 of 2014 titled 'Gurjit Singh @ Bunty vs. State of Punjab'.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties.