2015 (12) TMI 1132 - HC - Indian Laws

Bail denied based on organized crime ties, drug trafficking, and past criminal record.

Paramjit Singh @ Pamma Versus State of Punjab

The court dismissed the bail application due to the petitioner's alleged involvement in organized crime, theft of vehicles for drug trafficking, and past ... Enlargement on bail in FIR of NDPS Act, 1985 (Sections 468, 471 IPC and Sections 25,25A,27,29 NDPS Act & 25/54/59 Arms Act) - Held that:- The summary of cases registered against the petitioner in different States prima facie reveals that he is member of an organized group involved in the theft of vehicles for further sale to drug traffickeers with fake and forged ‘engine’, ‘chassis’ and ‘registration’ numbers. If proved, the petitioner might be liable for punishment under Section 25 of the NDPS Act as well for allowing the use of conveyance for the commission of an offence punishable under that Act. The allegations made against the petitioner are of indirect financing of the illicit traffic within the meaning of Section 27-A, besides abetment thereof in terms of Section 29 of the Act. His past credentials and the fact that he was declared PO, surely dissuade us to release him on bail at this stage. Issues:Enlargement on bail in a case involving theft of vehicles and drug trafficking under various sections of IPC, NDPS Act, and Arms Act.Analysis:Issue 1: Bail application in a case involving theft of vehicles and drug trafficking.The petitioner sought bail in a case registered under various sections of IPC, NDPS Act, and Arms Act. The FIR mentioned the involvement of the petitioner in stealing vehicles used for transporting illicit substances. The petitioner was not named in the original FIR but was implicated based on statements and connections to known offenders.Issue 2: Allegations and evidence against the petitioner.The police claimed that the petitioner was part of an organized gang involved in drug trafficking and vehicle theft. The petitioner was allegedly skilled in tampering with vehicle identification numbers and supplying stolen vehicles to drug traffickers. Multiple luxury vehicles were recovered, and the petitioner had a history of involvement in similar cases of theft and illicit activities.Issue 3: Petitioner's defense and denial of involvement.The petitioner denied his involvement and claimed false implication due to previous legal actions against law enforcement. The petitioner's two brothers were also arrested in connection with the case. However, the court found the evidence and past criminal record compelling, leading to the denial of bail.Issue 4: Legal implications and decision.The court considered the seriousness of the allegations, including potential violations of NDPS Act provisions related to indirect financing of illicit activities and abetment of offenses. Given the petitioner's criminal history, involvement in organized crime, and being declared a proclaimed offender, the court decided to dismiss the bail application, emphasizing the risk of continued criminal activities if released.In conclusion, the court dismissed the bail application based on the petitioner's alleged involvement in organized crime, theft of vehicles for drug trafficking, and past criminal record, highlighting the potential violations of NDPS Act provisions and the risk of further criminal activities if released on bail.