In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ...... Criminal Misc. No.M-30836 of 2010 ..... Date of decision:5.1.2011 Kuldip Singh .....Petitioner v. State of Punjab .....Respondent .... Present: Mr. Satnam Singh Gill, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. T.S. Salana, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State. ..... S.S. Saron, J. Heard leaned counsel for the parties. The petitioner seeks regular bail in a case registered against him on 10.4.2010 for the offences under Sections 15 and 25 of the NDPS Act. The FIR in the case has been registered on the basis of a memo (Ruqa) sent by ASI Harbinder Singh, CIA Staff, Patiala. The said ASI along with other Police officials were in a private vehicle in connection with patrolling. They were present at the road of over bridge bye-pass, Patiala to Shermajra. At about 1.30 p.m. one sky-blue colour Maruti car came from Pashiyana side. The driver of the said vehicle on seeing checking being carried out by the Police stopped the car about 25 Karams ahead. He got out of the door and ran away towards the fields. ASI Harbinder Singh and HC Lakhwinder Singh identified him as Jujhar Singh. HC Shinder Pal was Cr. Misc. No.M-30836 of 2010 [2] instructed to chase him. ASI Harbinder Singh with the help of his other companions apprehended two persons who were trying to run away from the car. In the meantime, another Maruti car came from Pashiyana Village side which was stopped. The driver disclosed his name as Satnam Singh. He was associated with the Police party. The persons who were apprehended disclosed their respective names. The person sitting on the left seat of the driver disclosed his name as Bhupinder Singh. The person who was sitting on the back seat disclosed his name as Kuldip Singh (petitioner). He also disclosed that the person who had run away was Jujhar Singh. The search of the car was carried out and two gunny bags containing poppy husk were found and each bag weighed 40 Kgs. The samples were taken according to the procedure prescribed. The petitioner was apprehended and is in custody since 10.4.2010. The prosecution has cited 10 PWs and out of them two have been examined till date. The trial in the case is likely to take time. According to the learned counsel for the State, there is no other case registered against the petitioner. The prosecution is to establish its case by leading evidence. Learned counsel for the petitioner has raised several contentions that the use of private vehicles for patrolling and effecting recovery has been stopped by the Director General of Police regarding which an affidavit has been filed in this Court. Besides, the place of recovery is an open place and it is not possible for the co-accused to run away from the spot in the presence of trained Police officials. Moreover, the petitioner was only sitting in the car and cannot be said to be in conscious possession of the contraband. These aspects would require Cr. Misc. No.M-30836 of 2010 [3] consideration by the learned trial Court. In the facts and circumstances, it can be said from the material as placed on record that the petitioner is not likely to indulge in activities relating to Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances. Besides, the case is to be established by the prosecution after the evidence is led. In the circumstances, the petitioner on his furnishing personal bond and surety to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patiala shall be admitted to bail. The criminal miscellaneous petition stands disposed of. January 5, 2011. (S.S. Saron) Judge *hsp*