9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (4) TMI 1216X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under Airway Bill No. 7185476351 and 7185476362 destined from New Delhi to Canada were detained at DHL Courier Company at Kirti Nagar. The said parcels were booked by co-accused Sita @ Priya Mandal @ Christina Rozaria at the instance of the present petitioner David Collins. Both the parcels were examined and 245 grams and 425 grams of Heroin respectively were recovered. Thereafter search was also conducted at the residence of present petitioner which also resulted in to the recovery of 12 grams Cocaine and 20 gm Methaempthaine. 3. I have heard the Ld. counsel for the parties and perused the records of this case. 4. Ld. counsel for the petitioner has argued on the lines of the bail application. It is submitted that there is no evidence to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3217 of 2012 (O&M). (c) Raj Karan Singh @ Rajan Vs State of Punjab (29 June, 2015) High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh, CRM-M-17321 of 2015. (d) Vicky Kaur vs State of Punjab (13 August, 2018) CRR No. 1785 of 2018 (O&M) High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. 5. On the other hand, it is submitted by the Ld. counsel for the respondent that after the recovery of contraband at DHL Courier office, search was conducted at the residence of the petitioner which resulted in recovery of 12 grams Cocaine and 20 gm Methaempthaine. It is further submitted by the Ld. counsel for the respondent that co-accused Sita @ Priya Mandal gave voluntary statement U/s 67 of the NDPS Act wherein she has categorically stated that she had booked ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e statement of the witnesses and the documents and at the stage of bail, it would not be proper to minutely analyze the statement of the prosecution witnesses and the documents and in depth analysis of the case of the prosecution is not to be undertaken as it might prejudice the case of either of the parties. The question as to whether the petitioner and his co-accused were having common intention is also to be seen during the course of trial. 7. The allegations against the petitioner are that of dealing with the commercial quantity of the contraband and therefore, rigors of Section 37 NDPS Act are applicable. In the present case, there is nothing before this Court to believe that the petitioner/accused is not guilty or he would not commit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
