IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc M-25556 of 2010 Date of decision: 25.10.2010 Bheem Singh @ Bheema …Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …Respondent Present: Mr SS Gill, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr VPS Sidhu, AAG Punjab. S.S.SARON, J. Heard counsel for the parties. The petitioner seeks regular bail in a case registered against him for the offence under Section 15 of the NDPS Act (Act – for short). The FIR in the case has been registered on the basis of a memo sent by Hari Singh ASI to PS Sadar, Rajpura. On 7.11.2009, Hari Singh ASI along with other Police officials was on patrol duty and was present at the check post set up at the crossing in the area of village Takhat Majra. While he was talking to Sampuran Singh at about 2 p.m., then a silver coloured Indica car was seen coming from the link road from the side of Gopalpur. The car was signaled to stop. The driver braked and stopped the vehicle atleast 15 steps behind the check post. After stopping the car, he started running. He was over-powered and the person sitting on the rear seat was asked about his name and address. The driver of the car disclosed his name as Raminder Singh @ Romi while the person sitting on the rear seat disclosed his name as Bheem Singh @ Beema (petitioner). One plastic Cr Misc M- 25556 of 2010 2 bag was seen lying on the rear seat and one on the left side front seat on the floor of the car. On account of suspicion, the bags were searched and were found to contain poppy husk. Both the bags were weighed and were found to contain 40 kgs each of the recovered contraband, total 80 kgs. The driver of the car namely Raminder Singh has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 22.7.2010 passed in Criminal Misc M-18873 of 2010 on medical grounds. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is neither driver nor owner of the vehicle. Besides, it is submitted that no recovery has been effected from him. In any case, the petitioner cannot be said to be in conscious possession of the contraband and the recovery effected from the car, which does not belong to him clearly shows that he is not involved. In response, learned counsel for the State submits that the petitioner was apprehended and 80 kgs of poppy husk has been recovered. After giving my thoughtful consideration to the matter, it may be noticed that the petitioner was arrested on 7.11.2009 and since then he is in custody. The challan in the case has been filed. The prosecution is to examine 15 witnesses and only 2 have been examined so far. The trial in the case is likely to take time. All the witnesses are official witnesses and it is unlikely that the petitioner would be able to influence them. Learned counsel for the State has submitted that there is no other case pending against the petitioner. The question whether the petitioner was in conscious possession of the contraband that was recovered from the vehicle, is to be considered and gone into by the trial Court. The fact that he is not involved in any other case, it can be said that while on bail, he is unlikely to commit an offence under the Act. Cr Misc M- 25556 of 2010 3 In the circumstances, the petitioner, on his furnishing personal bond and surety to the satisfaction of the learned CJM, Patiala, shall be admitted to bail. This petition stands disposed of. 25.10.2010 ( S.S.SARON ) ASR Judge