NDPS Act | Mere Pregnancy Of Wife Not Reason Enough For Grant Of Interim Bail: Punjab & Haryana High Court
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has held that mere pregnancy of the wife is not a reason enough for the grant of interim bail to the person accused under Sections 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) registered at Police Station City Khanna, District Ludhiana in October 2022. The Court was hearing the petition under Section 439 Cr.PC read...
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has held that mere pregnancy of the wife is not a reason enough for the grant of interim bail to the person accused under Sections 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) registered at Police Station City Khanna, District Ludhiana in October 2022.
The Court was hearing the petition under Section 439 Cr.PC read with Section 482 Cr.PC for the grant of interim bail.
The bench of Justice Jagjit Singh Bedi said that, “…mere pregnancy is not a reason enough for the grant of interim bail to the petitioner as the said condition is not a medical condition for which hopsitalization is needed for a significant length of time.”
The police had received information that the petitioner, Imtiyaz Ahmed, a resident of Jammu and Kashmir, and Ishtiyak Ahmed used to load fruits and other items from Kashmir and go to Azad Mandi. They would then bring back a large quantity of intoxicant vials and injections from Delhi, which they would sell in Kashmir at a profit.
Based on the information, an FIR was registered, and subsequently, the petitioner and his co-accused were arrested. The police recovered 20 bottles, each containing 100ml of intoxicating liquid containing Codeine Phosphate Syrup.
The counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and, since his wife was in an advanced stage of pregnancy, he should be released on interim bail.
He also submitted that the petitioner is the sole breadwinner of the family, and there is no one else to look after his wife.
The State counsel on the other hand contended that the petitioner is one of the main accused. Commercial quantity of contraband has been recovered from the petitioner and his co-accused.
The counsel also pointed out that the petitioner's first bail application had been dismissed as withdrawn by the court in January 2023.
He further submitted that the mere pregnancy of the accused's wife did not entitle him to be granted bail, considering the nature of the allegations against him.
Additionally, as the petitioner was a resident of another state, there was a high likelihood that he would abscond if granted bail.
After hearing both the sides the Court opined that petitioner is undoubtedly one of the main accused and a resident of J&K.
The Court stated that there was a high possibility of the petitioner absconding from justice if granted interim bail.
The Court also explained that even without considering this possibility, the mere pregnancy of the petitioner's wife is not a valid reason for the grant of interim bail, as it is not a medical condition requiring hospitalization for a significant length of time.
Furthermore, the Court noted that the petitioner's previous bail application had already been withdrawn on 17.01.2023.
In light of the above the petition was dismissed.
Case Title: Imtiyaz Ahmed v. State of Punjab
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (PH) 71
Counsel for Petitioner:S.P.S. Khaira
Counsel for State:Kirat Singh Sidhu