GURDEV SINGH Vs. UNION TERRITORY OF J&K
LAWS(J&K)-2020-12-1
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
Decided on December 18,2020

GURDEV SINGH Appellant
VERSUS
Union Territory Of JAndK Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

DEVI DAS RAGHU NATH NAIK V. STATE [REFERRED TO]
GURCHARAN SINGH RAJ KUMAR SHARMA VS. STATE DELHI ADMINISTRATION :STATE DELHI ADMINISTRATION [REFERRED TO]
UDAY MOHANLAL ACHARYA VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

SANJAY DHAR,J. - (1.)FIR No. 17/2020 for offences under Sections 8/15 NDPS Act came to be registered by the Police of Police Station, Banihal on the basis of an information received from the reliable sources to the effect that a Truck bearing Registration No. PB02CC-7060 in which some narcotic drugs were concealed was coming from Kashmir towards Jammu. On this information, the police laid a naka at Chakori Nallah and stopped the aforesaid Truck, which was being driven by the petitioner herein. Upon conducting the search of the aforesaid Truck, 44 kgs of poppy straw was recovered from its tool box.
(2.)It appears that the petitioner had filed an application for grant of bail in his favour in the aforesaid FIR before the Court of Principal Sessions Judge, Ramban,(hereinafter referred to as the 'Special Judge') but the same was rejected by the said Court vide order dated 24.06.2020. Being aggrieved of the said order, the petitioner has filed the instant petition before this Court for grant of bail in his favour on the grounds that the petitioner is entitled to grant of default bail because the investigating agency has failed to produce the chargesheet within the stipulated time; that the contraband allegedly shown to be recovered from the possession of the petitioner is an intermediate quantity, as such, the rigor of Section 37 NDPS Act will not apply to the present case; that there is grave threat to the life of the petitioner while being lodged in jail due to outbreak of Covid-19 infection; that the bail should not be denied to him as a measure of inflicting punishment upon him and that the petitioner will abide by all the conditions that may be imposed by this Court if he is enlarged on bail.
(3.)The respondent has resisted the bail petition by filing its reply thereto. In its reply, the respondent has contended that the offences committed by the petitioner/accused are serious, grave and heinous in nature and as such, he cannot claim bail as a matter of right; that the petitioner/accused is involved in the illicit trade of sale and purchase of narcotic substance i.e. Poppy Straw which is very dangerous for the society, especially for younger generation and its consumption by the youth may affect their health and future and that there is every apprehension that the petitioner/ accused may indulge in similar activities in case he is admitted to bail.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.