Contraband Smuggled In By Drones From Pakistan, Masterminds Behind Illegal Trafficking Can't Be Granted Bail: Punjab & Haryana HC

The Punjab & Haryana High Court has refused to grant bail to a man accused of illicit trafficking of 50 grams of heroin, observing that "the quantity involved is categorized as "Intermediate Quantity" does not, by itself, bestow an automatic right to bail.Justice Sandeep Moudgil said, "merely because the quantity involved is categorized as "Intermediate Quantity" does not, by itself, bestow an automatic right to bail. Granting bail to those accused of trafficking or peddling highly dangerous substances such as Heroin/Chitta would essentially offer carte blanche for illegal activities. Such a decision would embolden these individuals to persist in their illicit trade, operating under the misguided belief that even if apprehended, they could be swiftly released on bail."The judge opined that even if the stringent provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act do not apply, the petitioner cannot be granted an advantage or permission to seek bail, especially when 50 grams of Heroin was recovered."Granting bail at this stage could inadvertently signal a tacit approval or encouragement of such illegal activities," added the Court.Justice Moudgil highlighted that where 50 grams of heroin have been seized from the petitioner, the method of trafficking evidenced by the contraband being smuggled from Pakistan via drone "highlights the sophisticated network facilitating such illegal trade, which demands a resolute and uncompromising response."These observations were made while hearing the bail plea of one Sher Singh, accused under Sections 21, 29 and 21 (c) of NDPS Act, 1985 and section 10, 11 & 12 of Air Craft Act.1934 registered at Punjab's Taran Taran.After examining the submissions, the Court said that it is mindful that, according to the legal mandate rendered by the Supreme Court in Saumya Churasia versus Directorate of Enforcement [[Criminal Appeal No. 3840 of 2023] when considering a bail application, the Court is not obligated to meticulously examine the evidence gathered by the Investigating Agency."However, the Court must consider several factors, including the nature of the accusation, the type of evidence collected in support, the severity of the punishment for the alleged offences, the character of the accused, the unique circumstances surrounding the accused, the likelihood of securing the accused's presence during trial, the possibility of witness tampering, and the broader interests of the public or State," it added.The judge said that the tactics employed by drug peddlers engaging in the narcotics trade often involve starting with small or intermediate quantities, banking on the assumption that, even if apprehended, they will be granted bail. This, however, cannot be the intended purpose of the NDPS Act.In the present case, the Court noted that, the petitioner's criminal history, marked by involvement in three other similar cases, "raises serious concerns about the likelihood of reoffending" and there is a distinct possibility that, if granted bail, the petitioner will once again partake in this unlawful enterprise.In the light of the above, the Court rejected the plea.Title: Sher Singh v. State of PunjabSukhbir Mandi, advocate for the petitioner.Click here to read/download the order

Contraband Smuggled In By Drones From Pakistan, Masterminds Behind Illegal Trafficking Can't Be Granted Bail: Punjab & Haryana HC

Aiman J. Chishti

Tags