In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ...... Criminal Misc. No.M-7193 of 2009 ..... Date of decision:20.1.2010 Jeeva Singh .....Petitioner v. State of Punjab .....Respondent .... Present: Mr. C.L. Verma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Shilesh Gupta, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State. ..... S.S. Saron, J. Learned counsel for the State has submitted that on the last date of hearing fixed before the trial Court on 12.1.2010, Constable Gursewak Singh has been given-up; besides MHC Charanjit Singh, Constable Harminder Kumar and ASI Gurmail Singh have been examined completely. Moreover, SI/SHO Gurmail Singh has been partly examined and his further examination-in-chief has been deferred. HC Kuldip Singh was present before the trial Court. Now the case is fixed for 25.1.2009 for recording the remaining evidence of SI Gurmail Singh and also the evidence of HC Kuldip Singh. Affidavit of Shri Anil Joshi, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Payal, Police District Khanna has been filed in which it is stated that the case before the trial Court is fixed on 25.1.2010 and for the said date three witnesses, namely, DSP Rattan Singh Brar, ASI Rajwant Singh and Harpreet Singh have also been summoned. Besides, the evidence of ASI Harnek Singh, HC Kuldip Singh and HC Makhan Singh is yet to be recorded. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that in case Cr. Misc. No.M-7193 of 2009 [2] the percentage of the narcotic drug is taken into account from the entire substance of the contraband that has been recovered, the recovery would be less than commercial quantity. In support of his contention, learned counsel cites E. Micheal Raj v. Intelligence Officer, Narcotic Control Bureau, 2008 (2) RCR (Cr.) 597 (SC), Anup Gupta v. State of Punjab, 2008 (4) RCR (Cr.) 390 (DB) (P&H) and Abdul Majid v. State of Punjab, (Cr. Misc. No.M- 19350 of 2006) decided on 3.10.2008 (P&H). Learned counsel for the State has submitted that the prosecution evidence is almost complete and the trial is going on and the question regarding the percentage of the narcotic drugs in the contraband recovered is to be considered and gone into by the trial Court. After giving my thoughtful consideration to the matter, it may be noticed that in terms of the report of the Chemical Examiner (Annexure- P.4) 50.97% of Diacetyl Morphine was found in the contraband that has been recovered. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, this would work out to about 150 Grams which is less than the commercial quantity. However, the trial in the case is going on and the prosecution is examining its witnesses as has been noticed above. The affidavit of Shri Anil Joshi, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Payal has been filed in which it is stated that three witnesses have been summoned for 25.1.2010 and thereafter the evidence of ASI Harnek Singh, HC Kuldip Singh and HC Makhan Singh is to be recorded. Even if the percentage of the narcotic drug from the recovered contraband is taken to be less than the commercial quantity, the same would nevertheless be an offence. In any case, keeping in view the fact that the trial in the case is going on, no ground for grant of bail is made out at this stage. Cr. Misc. No.M-7193 of 2009 [3] Consequently, the criminal miscellaneous petition is dismissed. January 20, 2010. (S.S. Saron) Judge *hsp*