AMRITPAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner seeks bail pending trial in FIR No.168 dated 22.9.2014 registered under Sections 21 and 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropics Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'NDPS Act') at Police Station Gate Hakima, District Amritsar. Notice to the Advocate General, Punjab as well as Advocate General, Haryana.

(2.) On the asking of Court, Ms.Anmol Grewal, AAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the State of Punjab and Mr. Manoj Kumar Sangwan, DAG, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the State of Haryana. During the course of hearing, when confronted by the Court as to how the petitioner has got an indefeasible right of bail, the matter being serious in nature as it pertains to NDPS Act, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by way of instant petition under Section 439 read with Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('Cr.P.C.' for short), petitioner seeks only an interim bail till the presentation of police report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. He further submits that report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. has not been presented to the court so far, despite expiry of the statutory period. He submits that although the investigating agency is seeking extension in time, yet an indefeasible right has accrued in favour of the petitioner under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C.. However, he fairly states that he restricts his prayer only for an interim bail till the presentation of challan.

(3.) On the other hand, learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Tapinder Singh, Police Station, Gate Hakima, District Amritsar, submits that since the report from FSL has not been received so far, presentation of challan is being delayed, which is beyond the control of the investigating agency. However, the learned counsel for the State had no answer as to why the challan without the report of FSL could not be presented to the Court and rightly so, because, it was a matter of record. In fact, it is a very sorry state of affair that the investigating agency, particularly in the State of Punjab, is miserably failing in its duty in very many cases, particularly in the NDPS matters, while not following the mandatory provisions of law. Because of this wholly unwarranted situation created at the hands of the State, even the hardened criminals under the NDPS Act are getting the benefit of default bail. This is one of the strong reasons which gives rise to the cases under the NDPS Act. On the one hand, the State of Punjab is not setting up sufficient number of Forensic Science Laboratories ('FSL' for short) for the reasons best known to it, so as to ensure that no undue delay is caused in conducting the test of narcotic drugs and on the other hand in many cases police report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. is not being presented to the learned courts of competent jurisdiction within the statutory period or even during the extended period granted by the courts. Due to this delayed process, habitual and chronic offenders, particularly who are repeatedly indulging in NDPS cases, are getting undue benefit of default bail and had to be released by the courts, having been left with hardly any discretion in this regard. It has become a vicious circle and ultimately, the innocent public as well as the justice delivery system are the sufferers. It is very much avoidable, of course, but will to do is required to achieve this objective, which is conspicuously missing. The State cannot ignore its constitutional obligation in this regard and become a silent spectator.