VIJAY KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ACCORDING to the prosecution 2 Kgs of opium was recovered from the possession of the accused on 29.9.1997. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that so far no prosecution witness has been examined, although the petitioner has been in jail lying incarcerated for the last more than one year. It has bean held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sunil K. Sinha v. State of Bihar through S.P. CBI, 1998(5) Supreme Court Cases 607 that long incarceration without trial is a relevant consideration for the grant of bail. In Sunil K. Sinha v. State of Bihar through S.P. CBI (supra) where under-trial was being incarcerated for a long period of about 1 year and 10 months and the trial was likely to consume some more time. In such circumstances Hon'ble Supreme Court directed the undertrial to be released on bail. In Mr. Pehlwan's case, Criminal Appeal No. 789/1998 Hon'ble Supreme Court allowed bail, as he was accused of having kept a few bags of poppy husk and was lying in jail incarcerated for the last 11 months without trial having made any headway.

(2.) IN view of what has been observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sunil K. Sinha v. State of Bihar through S.P. CBI (supra) and Mr. Pehlwan v. State of Punjab, Criminal Appeal No. 789 of 1998, I think bail should be allowed to the petitioner. So, bail is allowed to the petitioner to the satisfaction of Judge, Special Court, Faridkot who is dealing with the cases under N.D.P.S. Act. Petition allowed.