Drug menace in Punjab eating into social, economic fabric of society: HC

Tribune News Service

Saurabh Malik

Chandigarh, April 28

In a significant judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has made it clear that recovery of opium from different accused cannot be joined together to examine whether it is commercial. But the Court at the same time cannot shut its eyes to the fact that the drug menace in Punjab is eating the social, economic and basic fabric of the society and any clever person on such technicalities can take the law for granted.

Court can’t shut eyes towards it

Recovery from the petitioner-accused is only to be considered to examine as to whether same is of commercial or non-commercial nature at the time of deciding the bail application. But the court cannot shut its eyes that menace of drugs is eating the social, economic and basic fabric of the society.

The assertion came as the HC denied bail to an accused travelling with another person with opium allegedly wrapped around their waists. Justice Gurbir Singh asserted the petitioner and co-accused were residents of the same village. They were travelling together in a bus and carrying opium wrapped on respective waists with the help of tape. As such, the recovery of opium attributed to each accused could not be joined together.

Justice Gurbir Singh added the court was in “respectful agreement” with a case law cited by the petitioner’s counsel, wherein it was held that only recovery from the petitioner was to be considered to examine to whether the same was of commercial or non-commercial nature at the time of deciding the bail application.

The accused in the case was seeking the grant of regular bail in the case registered on July 28, 2022, under the provisions of the NDPS Act. His counsel said the petitioner was in custody since July last year from the date of his arrest and had already undergone more than seven-and-a-half months of custody. Besides this, the completion of trial would take a long time.

Opposing the bail plea, the State counsel in the case had contended that the recovery of opium from both the accused was required to be clubbed since they were known to each other and travelling together to deliver opium to one person.

“The petitioner and co-petitioner are so clever that in order to avoid the strict provisions of law, they were carrying contraband in such a manner that the same fall under the non-commercial quantity. They were to deliver opium to same person. The recovery of opium from petitioner is not marginally higher than small quantity. So, under such circumstances, the petitioner is not entitled for bail at this stage,” Justice Gurbir Singh asserted, while dismissing the plea.

About The Author

Tribune News Service

The Tribune News Service brings you the latest news, analysis and insights from the region, India and around the world. Follow the Tribune News Service for a wide-ranging coverage of events as they unfold, with perspective and clarity.

#drug menace