Jaswant Singh @ Jassa Vs State Of Punjab

High Court Of Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh 27 May 2022 Criminal Miscellaneous Petition (M) No. 22627 Of 2022 (O&M) (2022) 05 P&H CK 0125
Bench: Single Bench
Result Published
Acts Referenced

Judgement Snapshot

Case Number

Criminal Miscellaneous Petition (M) No. 22627 Of 2022 (O&M)

Hon'ble Bench

Arvind Singh Sangwan, J

Advocates

Gagandeep Rana, Joginder Pal Ratra

Final Decision

Allowed

Acts Referred
  • Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 439
  • Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Section 21, 29
  • Arms Act, 1959 - Section 25

Judgement Text

Translate:

Arvind Singh Sangwan, J

This is the second petition that has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case

FIR No. 246 dated 11.12.2020, under Sections 21 and 29 of the NDPS Act, 1985 and Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 at Police Station Lohian,

District Jalandhar-Rural.

The first petition, bearing CRM-M-15244-2021, was dismissed as withdrawn on 21.03.2022 and the new ground for filing the present petition is that

the petitioner is in judicial custody for the last 01 year, 03 months and 18 days and the trial is not proceeding.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per allegations in the FIR, registered at the instance of Inspector Jarnail Singh, it is stated that while

on a patrol duty, a secret information was received that Parminder Singh @ Bhinda s/o Resham Singh is confined in Ferozepur Jail and he is indulged

in smuggling of heroin from the jail itself through his friends Rakesh Kumar @ Kesha s/o Balwant Singh, Jaswinder Singh s/o Sukhdev Singh and

Gursewak Singh s/o Gurcharan Singh and have procured a consignment of heroin and illegal arms from Srinagar in a car. It was further stated that

Rakesh Kumar @ Kesha and Jaswinder Singh are in a process to make further arrangements at the house of Jaswinder Singh to sell it of and if a raid

is conducted, a huge quantity of heroin can be recovered. On this, a ruqa was sent to the police station and thereafter, a raiding party was constituted

and the aforesaid two persons, Rakesh Kumar @ Kesha and Jaswinder Singh, were arrested and 04 kgs. of heroin was recovered, i.e. 02 kgs. each

from Rakesh Kumar @ Kesha and Jaswinder Singh along with a country made pistol.

Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner was not named in the secret information and even was not present at the place, from where the

recovery was effected from aforesaid co-accused.

It is further submitted that during investigation, the police recorded the disclosure of co-accused Parminder Singh @ Bhinda, in which the petitioner

was nominated as an accused and the petitioner was arrested. After the arrest of the petitioner, disclosure of the petitioner was also recorded, in

which he stated that he was to purchase 01 kg heroin from co-accused Rakesh Kumar @ Kesha and Jaswinder Singh, however, no

narcotic/contraband was recovered from the petitioner and even no drug money was recovered from him to co-relate his own disclosure that he was

indulged in that business.

Learned counsel further submits that though the petitioner is involved in some other cases under the provisions of IPC, however, he stands acquitted in

majority of the cases, as per judgment attached with this petition as Annexures P-4 to P-7 and in two FIRs under the NDPS Act, he is on bail and

facing trial.

It is further submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody for the last 01 year, 03 months and 18 days; out of 12 prosecution witnesses, 05

witnesses have been examined and conclusion of trial is likely to take a long time.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in view of the judgments rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Tofan Singh vs. State of Tamil

Nadu, (2021) 4 SCC 1 and State By (NCB) Bengaluru vs. Pallulabid Ahmad Arimutta & Anr. 2022 Live Law (SC) 69, it will be a matter of trial

whether disclosure of the co-accused is admissible against the petitioner or not, though there is a disclosure of petitioner himself, however, the same is

not followed by any recovery.

Learned State counsel, on the basis of the custody certificate filed today in Court, has not disputed the factual position. It is also not disputed that the

petitioner stands acquitted in some of the cases and in pursuance to his disclosure, no recovery was effected from him.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

Without commenting upon the merits of the case, considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and also in view of the ratio of law laid down by

Hon'ble Supreme Court in aforesaid judgments, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing

bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Illaqa Magistrate, concerned.

From The Blog
Madras High Court to Hear School’s Plea Against State Objection to RSS Camp on Campus
Feb
07
2026

Court News

Madras High Court to Hear School’s Plea Against State Objection to RSS Camp on Campus
Read More
Delhi High Court Quashes Ban on Medical Students’ Inter-College Migration, Calls Rule Arbitrary
Feb
07
2026

Court News

Delhi High Court Quashes Ban on Medical Students’ Inter-College Migration, Calls Rule Arbitrary
Read More