No Prudent Man Will Carry 2Kg Drugs In Transparent Packet: P&H High Court While Granting Bail In NDPS Case

The Punjab and Haryana High Court, while granting bail in a case under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, observed that it is highly improbable for a reasonable or prudent person to carry 2 kilograms of contraband openly in a transparent polythene bag. 

The Accused was in custody for a period of over 2 years, 10 months and after framing of charges in May 2023 out of total 13 prosecution witnesses, only 05 witnesses were examined.

Justice Sandeep Moudgil observed, "Moreover it is believed to be highly unlikely for a reasonably prudent man and carry 2 kg 600 grams of contraband in a transparent polythene in plain sight as alleged in the FIR."

The Court also considered the judgements of the High Court wherein the recovery from the accused was marginally over and above the commercial quantity for the respective contraband in each case, underscoring that "the Courts have taken a lenient view while granting bail to the accused therein."

Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the accused has been falsely implicated in the present case with ulterior motive and nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. 

Opposing the plea, the State counsel prayed for dismissal of the present petition stating that the recovery i.e. 2 Kg 600 Grams of Opium fall under the commercial quantity and therefore Sections 37 of NDPS Act would be attracted.

After hearing the submissions, the Court relied on Dataram v. State of Uttar Pradesh and another (2018) where it was held that the grant of bail is a general rule and putting persons in jail or in prison or in correction home is an exception.

"Constitutional right cannot be denied to the accused as is the mandate of the Apex court in “Hussainara Khatoon and ors (IV) v. Home Secretary, State of Bihar, Patna”, (1980) 1 SCC 98. Besides this, reference can be drawn upon that pre-conviction period of the under-trials should be as short as possible keeping in view the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness or apprehension of threat to the complainant," added the judge.

In the light of the above the plea was allowed.

Mr. Nikhil Ghai, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Rajiv Verma, Sr. DAG Punjab.

Title: Suresh Chand v. State of Punjab

Click here to read/download the order