Read Time: 07 minutes

The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently denied interim bail to a man accused under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 while stating that the mere pregnancy of his wife was not a reason enough for grant of such interim relief. 

"...the said condition is not a medical condition for which hospitalization is needed for a significant length of time," opined single judge bench of Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi. 

Imtiyaz Ahmed (the accused)who is a resident of Jammu and Kashmir had been arrested by the police in October last year. Allegations against Imtiyaz were that he and Ishtiyak Ahmed were involved in bringing huge quantities of intoxicant vials and injections from Delhi to Kashmir in the garb of fruits and other things and they used to sell the same at a profit.

Last year in October, when the police party was on patrolling duty, information was received that one such truck of Imtiyaz and Ishtiyak was parked near Dhaba Market, Khanna in which intoxicating vials and injections were loaded. 

Based on the information, an FIR came to be registered under Sections 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 registered at Police Station City Khanna, District Ludhiana.

Subsequent thereto Imtiyaz and his co-accused were arrested and the recovery of 20 bottles of 100 mls each of intoxicating liquid containing Codeine Phosphate Syrup came to be effected.

Seeking interim bail, Imtiyaz's counsel argued before the high court that Imtiyaz had been falsely implecated in the matter. He also apprised the court that Imtiyaz's wife was in advanced stage of pregnancy, and Imtiyaz was the sole breadwinner of the family. 

Stating that there was no one else to look after Imtiyaz's wife as his parents were aged and his sisters were already married, Imtiyaz's counsel pressed for interim bail. 

However, the state counsel, while opposing the bail plea, submitted that Imtiyaz was one of the main accused in the case and commercial quantity of contraband had been recovered from him and his co-accused. 

The state counsel further informed the court that the first bail plea of Imtiyaz was rejected in January and at that time also his wife was pregnant but no such plea had been raised then. 

The state counsel argued that mere pregnancy of Imtiyaz's wife did not entitle him to the grant of bail keeping in view the nature of allegations against him as also the fact that he was a resident of another State and was likely to abscond in case he was granted the concession of bail.

Court agreed with the submissions of the state counsel and opined, "There is a very good possibility of the petitioner absconding from justice in case he is granted the concession of interim bail. Even otherwise 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 hospitalization is needed for a significant length of time".

Court also pointed out that there was nothing on record to suggest that the parental family members of Imtiyaz's wife were unable to take care of her.

In view of the above, court dismissed the present bail plea. 

Case Title: Imtiyaz Ahmed v. State of Punjab