BAIL APPLN./508/2020 of CHHINDERPAL SINGH Vs THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI ) NEW DELHI

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+BAIL APPLN. 508/2020CHHINDERPAL SINGH..... Petitioner

..... Petitioner

ThroughMr.Girish Kr. Sharma, Adv. withMs.Sushma Sharma & Mr.KaranVerma, Advs.

versus

THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI ) NEW DELHI..... RespondentThroughMr. Amit Chadha, APP for State.

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAITO R R%19.03.2020

Crl.M.A. 5620/2020

In view of the reasons stated in the present application, the applicationis allowed and disposed of.

BAIL APPLN. 508/2020

Present petition is filed under section 439 Cr.P.C. read with section482 Cr.P.C. for grant of bail in pursuance to FIR No.46/2019 registered atPolice Station Special Cell for the offence punishable under section 21NDPS Act.

With the consent of the parties, present petition is taken up for finaldisposal.

It is not in dispute that co-accused Rajvinder Singh and Hahat @ Lillihave been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 06.02.2020.

It is also an admitted fact that total quantity of recovered substancefrom accused nos.1 to 4 is 150.5 gms which is intermediate quantity whereasthe commercial quantity of said contraband is 250 gms. Hence, provision ofsection 37 NDPS Act does not attract.

As per the recent judgment passed by this Court in the case of‘Sandeep Kumar vs. Central Bureau of Narcotics’, decided on 08.07.2019,2019 Lawsuit (DEL) 2001, after appreciating the law laid down by theHon'ble Supreme Court in ‘Rafiq Qureshi vs. NCB, Eastern Zonal Unit’,decided on 07.05.2019, 2019 Lawsuit (SC) 1179, decided the case on thebasis of purity percentage available in the contraband.

In view of above, since the purity of the recovered contraband is lessthan 250 gm and the petitioner is in custody since 23.03.2019, petitionerdeserves benefit of the aforesaid judgments.

Learned APP has opposed the present petition and submits that otherco-accused have no other previous history of the offence, however, in thepresent case, there are four cases against petitioner under NDPS Act and twocases for other offences registered against the petitioner.

Counsel for the petitioner states at bar that petitioner has already beenacquitted in one of the cases and is on bail in the other case.

However, without commenting upon the merits of the case and thefact that there is no recovery effected from the petitioner herein and onparity, I am of the view that petitioner deserves bail.

Accordingly, he shall be released on bail on his furnishing personalbond in the sum of ₹25,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

Before parting with the order, it is relevant to mention that nothing

contained in this order shall be construed as an expression on the merits ofthe case. The Trial Court shall not get influenced by the observations madeby this Court, while passing the final orders in the trial.

The present petition is allowed and disposed of.

The date already fixed i.e. 30.03.2020 stands cancelled.

Copy of this order be transmitted to the Jail Superintendent and the

Trial Court concerned for compliance.

Order dasti under the signatures of Court Master.

MARCH 19, 2020

SURESH KUMAR KAIT, J