IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No.M- 3831 of 2010(O&M) Date of Decision: 01.04.2010. Sushil @Kaka ...... PETITIONER Versus State of Haryana. ...... RESPONDENT CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr. R.N.Lohan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ranvir Singh Arya, DA.G., Haryana. ***** RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) The present petition has been filed by Sushil @Kaka for grant of bail under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure in FIR No.759 dated 15.11.2009 under Section 21 of NDPS Act, Police Station city Jind. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that as per report of FSL contents of Heroin were found only 61.9% and that hence total contents of Heroin alleged to have been recovered from the possession of the petitioner comes to 186 grams only, which is less than commercial quantity. It is further contended that petitioner has been CRM No.M-3831 of 2010 continuing in custody since 15.11.2009 and that it will take time for the trial to conclude. Bail application of the petitioner has been vehemently opposed by the learned State counsel on the plea that seven witnesses have already been examined and only four witnesses remained to be examined. The next date fixed for remaining witnesses is 28.04.2010 and that hence, trial can be expedited. I have considered all the facts and circumstances of the case. Argument of learned counsel for the petitioner is that recovery of Heroin effected from the petitioner–accused comes to only 186 grams, which is less than commercial quantity. However, even if it is taken to be correct it cannot be said that he is entitled for bail. Even the said quantity could be used for intoxicating many youths. Petitioner is also likely to indulge in such like activities again if released on bail. Hence, keeping in view these facts and without expressing anything on the merit of the case, the instant application for bail filed by Sushil @Kaka is, hereby, dismissed being devoid of merit. However, learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial. ( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) April 1, 2010. JUDGE 'om' 2