CRM-M-42596 IN THE H (228) GURPREET SIN STATE OF PUNJ CORAM: HON Present: Mr. R Ms. S MANISHA BATR 1. The 483 of Bharatiya N of regular bail in under Sections 22 Act, 1985 (for sho The first petition a order dated 02.04. 2. As pe accused Satnam contraband i.e. 7 Alprazolam, had b into custody. Investigation now trial for commissio 2596-2025 (O&M) THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB A CHANDIGARH T SINGH @ GAGGU Versus
PUNJAB HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANIS . R.S. Gill, Advocate for the petitio Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab ****
BATRA, J. (ORAL)
The instant petition has been filed atiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in case arising out of FIR No.23 ons 22(C) and 29 of Narcotic Drugs or short “NDPS”) at Police Station Ci tition as filed by the petitioner had bee 02.04.2025. As per the allegations, on 24.12.2023 nam Singh was apprehended and recov i.e. 7600 intoxicating tablets of Tr had been effected from his conscious y. The petitioner and co-accus n now stands completed and he along mission of the aforementioned offence 1 JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH
CRM-M-42596-2025 (O&M) Date of decision : 09.02.2026 ... Petitioner
...Respondent
ANISHA BATRA
petitioner by the petitioner under Section , 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for grant 233 dated 24.12.2023 registered Drugs and Psychotropic Substances ion City Rampura, District Bathinda. ad been dismissed as withdrawn vide 2.2023, the petitioner alongwith co- d recovery of commercial quantity of of Tramadol and 3600 tablets of scious possession, which were taken accused were formally arrested. alongwith the co-accused is facing offences. M) 2026 ction grant tered nces inda. vide - ty of ts of aken sted. cing AMIT SHARMA 2026.02.10 12:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-42596 3. It is a falsely implicated The petitioner and by the Police on th taken by the poli disabled and DVR incarceration wou considerable time day spent by him afresh. The co-ac too deserves to be petition deserves t 4. Status counsel has argue petitioner. Comm The rigors of Sec petition being succ the petition does n 5. This counsel for the par 6. The found in consciou on 24.12.2023. subject offences as 2596-2025 (O&M) It is argued by learned counsel for t licated in this case. A false recovery er and the co-accused were apprehen e on the night of 23.12.2024. The key e police officials. The camera ins d DVR was removed. He is in cus n would not serve any useful pu e time to conclude as only charges ha y him in custody has furnished a grou accused has already been extended s to be extended the same benefit. I erves to be allowed. Status report and custody certificate h argued that there are serious and sp Commercial quantity of contraband f Section 37 of the NDPS Act are g successive petition is not maintaina does not deserve to be allowed. This Court has heard the rival subm the parties at considerable length. The petitioner alongwith the co-acc nscious possession of commercial qua 23. The allegations prima facie make nces as against the petitioner. Howeve 2 for the petitioner that he has been covery has been planted upon him. prehended and wrongfully confined he keys of their lab had been forcibly ra installed therein was tried to be in custody since long. His further ul purpose. The trial will take ges have been framed so far. Each a ground for seeking benefit of bail tended benefit of bail. On parity, he efit. It is, therefore, urged that the icate have been filed. Learned State and specific allegations against the band had been recovered from him. ct are attracted in this case. This ntainable. It is, therefore, urged that l submissions made by the learned accused is alleged to have been ial quantity of intoxicating tablets as make out a case for commission of owever, he is in custody for a period been him. fined cibly o be rther take Each bail y, he t the State t the him. This that rned been ts as n of eriod AMIT SHARMA 2026.02.10 12:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-42596 of over two years. only charges have a ground to move catena of cases tha of time and the ba filed repeatedly. provide a new c circumstances. T that law prefers b the requirements o ground for recons detention prior to of law that prolon fundamental right cases, when there the part of the accu of this case, appar this Court is of th by keeping the pet released on bail. ordered to be adm bonds to the satisf 7. Howe cancellation of b subsequent case an 2596-2025 (O&M) years. The trial is likely to take consi s have been framed only. This factor, move for bail afresh. The Hon’ble A ses that an accused cannot be kept in c the bail application can be considered edly. It has also been held that eve new cause of action for filing a b es. This principle is a part of the b fers bail over jail, aiming to balance ents of the criminal justice system. reconsideration of bail since the se ior to trial should not become punitive prolonged incarceration generally mili l right guaranteed under Article 21 of there is delay in conclusion of trial w he accused, he becomes entitled to be r apparently and evidently is shown t s of the considered opinion that no fru the petitioner in custody any more. On bail. Accordingly, the petition is admitted to bail subject to his furnis satisfaction of learned trial Court/CJM owever, it will be open for th of bail in case the petitioner is f case and if it appears that it is on acco 3 considerable time to conclude since actor, in the opinion of this Court, is ble Apex Court has observed in a pt in custody for an indefinite period idered on its own merits even if it is at every day spent in custody can g a bail application under certain the broader approach emphasizing lance the rights of the accused with tem. Prolonged detention itself is a the settled principle of law is that unitive. It is well settled proposition militates against the most precious 21 of the Constitution and in such l without there being any fault on to be released on bail. Since the trial own to have been delayed, as such, no fruitful purpose would be served On parity also, he deserves to be on is allowed and the petitioner is furnishing personal as well as surety rt/CJM/Duty Magistrate concerned. for the prosecution to apply for r is found involved in any other n account of any act and conduct of since rt, is in a eriod is can rtain izing with f is a that ition cious such lt on trial such, rved to be er is urety for other ct of AMIT SHARMA 2026.02.10 12:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-42596 the petitioner that further subject to h (i) (ii) eve ord (iii ind fac to t (iv) gra 8. In th conditions, the re seeking cancellatio 9. It is m the purpose of dec on the merits of th 10. Since any, is rendered in 09.02.2026 Amit Sharma 2596-2025 (O&M) r that further delay is being caused in ect to his abiding by the following cond (i) The petitioner will not tamper w (ii) The petitioner will appear befo every date fixed, unless his prese order of the Court. (iii) The petitioner shall not dire inducement, threat or promise to a facts of the case so as to dissuade h to the Court or to any police officer (iv) Any infraction shall entail i granted by the Court. In the eventuality of breach of the respondent-State shall be at lib cellation of the bail. It is made clear that any observation of deciding the present petition and t s of the case. Since the main petition has been all ered infructuous. (MA Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes
   4 sed in the conclusion of the trial and conditions: mper with evidence during trial. r before the Trial Court on each and presence is exempted by specified ot directly or indirectly make any se to any person acquainted with the uade him from disclosing such facts officer. ntail in withdrawal of the benefit h of any of the aforementioned at liberty to move an application vation made herein above is only for and the same shall have no bearing een allowed, pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA)
JUDGE
Yes/No
l and and ified y h the facts nefit oned ation y for aring n, if AMIT SHARMA 2026.02.10 12:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.