IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM No.M 4264 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 15.2.2011 Gurmukh Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr.AK Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner *** Ram Chand Gupta, J.(Oral) CRM No.7857 of 2011 Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. CRM No.M 4264 of 2011 The present petition has been filed by petitioner Gurmukh Singh under Section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail in case FIR No. 94 dated 6.7.2010 registered under Sections 15/25 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for brevity 'the Act') at Police Station Ahmedgarh, District Sangrur. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the whole record carefully including the impugned order passed by the learned trial court vide, which the bail application of the petitioner was dismissed. This is second application for regular bail filed on behalf of the petitioner. Earlier bail application was got dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 1.10.2010. Briefly stated, petitioner accused is the registered owner of truck bearing registration No. PB-13P-8295. Co-accused were found carrying poppy straw weighing 210 kgs in the said truck owned by the CRM No.M 4264 of 2011 (O&M) -2- petitioner-accused. Prosecution case is that petitioner-accused allowed use of his truck for carrying such huge contraband (poppy straw). It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that it was not in the knowledge of petitioner-accused that the co-accused were carrying poppy straw in the truck owned by him and that he is innocent. It is further contended that though he has been charged for offence under Section 25 of the Act and however, no offence is made out against him. It is further contended that he is in custody since 6.7.2010 and however, no witness has been examined so far. The allegations against the petitioner-accused are serious in nature. He is the registered owner of the vehicle, in which the poppy straw was being transported by the co-accused. He has been charged by learned trial court for offence under Section 25 of the Act. Bail application was opposed on behalf of the State before learned Trial Court. No witness has been examined so far. Hence, in view of the bar created under Section 37 of the Act, it cannot be said that the petitioner-accused is entitled for bail. Hence, keeping in view these facts and without expressing anything on the merit of the case, I am of the view that it is not such a case in which concession of bail should be granted to the petitioner-accused. There is no merit in the instant petition filed by petitioner Gurmukh Singh for grant of regular bail and the same is, hereby, dismissed. However, learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial as the petitioner has been continuing in custody since 6.7.2010. February 15, 2011 (RAM CHAND GUPTA) gsv JUDGE