CRM-M- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT 142 Vijay Kumar alias Laddi State of Punjab Date of decision: Date of Uploading : CORAM: Present: SUMEET GOEL 1. Nagarik Sur the petitioner, in case bearing FIR No. offences punishable under Section Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’) (Section 29 of the NDPS Act added later on), at Police Station 2. accused of being involved in an FIR pertaining to NDPS Act involving alleged recovery of 2 3. is in custody since mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act have not scrupulously been complied with, and thus, the prosecution case suffers from inherent defects. Learned counsel has iterated that the trial is delayed and the liability thereof cannot be -32769-2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Vijay Kumar alias Laddi V/s State of Punjab Date of decision: 15.07.2026 Date of Uploading : 16.07.2026 CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Mr. Kartik Gandhi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Hemant Aggarwal, DAG Punjab. ***** SUMEET GOEL, J. (Oral) Present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, in case bearing FIR No.149 offences punishable under Sections 15 and 25 Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’) (Section 29 of the NDPS Act added later on), at Police Station The gravamen of allegations against the petitioner is that he is an cused of being involved in an FIR pertaining to NDPS Act involving alleged recovery of 280 kgs of poppy husk. Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the petitioner is in custody since 02.08.2025. Learned counsel has further submitted th mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act have not scrupulously been complied with, and thus, the prosecution case suffers from inherent defects. Learned counsel has iterated that the trial is delayed and the liability thereof cannot be 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-32769-2026 ....Petitioner ....Respondent HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Mr. Kartik Gandhi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Hemant Aggarwal, DAG Punjab. Present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya aksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to dated 02.08.2025, registered for the 15 and 25 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’) (Section 29 of the NDPS Act added later on), at Police Station Sadar Jagraon, District Ludhiana. The gravamen of allegations against the petitioner is that he is an cused of being involved in an FIR pertaining to NDPS Act involving alleged Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the petitioner . Learned counsel has further submitted th mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act have not scrupulously been complied with, and thus, the prosecution case suffers from inherent defects. Learned counsel has iterated that the trial is delayed and the liability thereof cannot be Present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya aksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to , registered for the of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’) (Section 29 of the Sadar Jagraon, District Ludhiana. The gravamen of allegations against the petitioner is that he is an cused of being involved in an FIR pertaining to NDPS Act involving alleged Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the petitioner . Learned counsel has further submitted that mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act have not scrupulously been complied with, and thus, the prosecution case suffers from inherent defects. Learned counsel has iterated that the trial is delayed and the liability thereof cannot be AJAY KUMAR 2026.07.16 17:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- fastened upon the pet culmination of investigation, challan stands presented, and out of total prosecution witnesses, none has been examined till date. Learned counsel has iterated that nothing is to be recovered from the pe urged that the petitioner was merely a cleaner on the truck in question and cannot be said to be in has been further contended that the co Hardeep Singh, has been granted the concession of anticipatory bail vide order dated 13.01.2026 passed in CRM iterated that the petitioner has suffered incarceration for On the strength of th 4. by arguing that the allegations raised against the petitioner are serious in nature and, thus, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of regular bail. Learned State counsel has further submit meet the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act and is, thus, liable to be rejected on this score alone. In case, the petitioner is released on bail, there is all likelihood that he may abscond from the process of justi with the prosecution witnesses/ evidence. petition in hand is prayed for. 5. book as also the record produced before me. 6. recovery of the contraband, disentitle the petitioner to the discretionary relief of regular bail. Furthermore, no accentuating or exceptional circumstances have been made out which may -32769-2026 fastened upon the petitioner. Learned counsel has also argued that upon culmination of investigation, challan stands presented, and out of total prosecution witnesses, none has been examined till date. Learned counsel has iterated that nothing is to be recovered from the pe urged that the petitioner was merely a cleaner on the truck in question and cannot be said to be in conscious possession of the contraband recovered. It has been further contended that the co- Hardeep Singh, has been granted the concession of anticipatory bail vide order dated 13.01.2026 passed in CRM-M-54093 iterated that the petitioner has suffered incarceration for On the strength of these submission, the grant of regular bail is entreated for. Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the present petition by arguing that the allegations raised against the petitioner are serious in nature and, thus, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of regular bail. Learned State counsel has further submitted that meet the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act and is, thus, liable to be rejected on this score alone. In case, the petitioner is released on bail, there is all likelihood that he may abscond from the process of justi with the prosecution witnesses/ evidence. petition in hand is prayed for. I have heard counsel for the rival parties and perused the paper book as also the record produced before me. In the considered opinion of this Court, the allegations as also recovery of the contraband, disentitle the petitioner to the discretionary relief of regular bail. Furthermore, no accentuating or exceptional circumstances have been made out which may prima facie 2 itioner. Learned counsel has also argued that upon culmination of investigation, challan stands presented, and out of total prosecution witnesses, none has been examined till date. Learned counsel has iterated that nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner. Learned counsel has urged that the petitioner was merely a cleaner on the truck in question and possession of the contraband recovered. It -accused of the petitioner namely Hardeep Singh, has been granted the concession of anticipatory bail vide order 54093-2025. Learned counsel has further iterated that the petitioner has suffered incarceration for approximately 01 year. ese submission, the grant of regular bail is entreated for. , learned State counsel has opposed the present petition by arguing that the allegations raised against the petitioner are serious in nature and, thus, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of regular bail. ted that the petition in hand does not meet the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act and is, thus, liable to be rejected on this score alone. In case, the petitioner is released on bail, there is all likelihood that he may abscond from the process of justice and also interfere with the prosecution witnesses/ evidence. Accordingly, the dismissal of the I have heard counsel for the rival parties and perused the paper book as also the record produced before me. considered opinion of this Court, the allegations as also recovery of the contraband, disentitle the petitioner to the discretionary relief of regular bail. Furthermore, no accentuating or exceptional circumstances prima facie constitute a compelling ground for itioner. Learned counsel has also argued that upon culmination of investigation, challan stands presented, and out of total 16 prosecution witnesses, none has been examined till date. Learned counsel has Learned counsel has urged that the petitioner was merely a cleaner on the truck in question and possession of the contraband recovered. It the petitioner namely Hardeep Singh, has been granted the concession of anticipatory bail vide order Learned counsel has further approximately 01 year. ese submission, the grant of regular bail is entreated for. , learned State counsel has opposed the present petition by arguing that the allegations raised against the petitioner are serious in nature and, thus, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of regular bail. petition in hand does not meet the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act and is, thus, liable to be rejected on this score alone. In case, the petitioner is released on bail, there is all ce and also interfere Accordingly, the dismissal of the I have heard counsel for the rival parties and perused the paper- considered opinion of this Court, the allegations as also recovery of the contraband, disentitle the petitioner to the discretionary relief of regular bail. Furthermore, no accentuating or exceptional circumstances constitute a compelling ground for AJAY KUMAR 2026.07.16 17:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- grant of regular bail to the petitioner, especially in light of the recovery of commercial quantity of the contraband. The Court cannot accept the plea of the false implication by any cogent material. The argument of the learned counsel that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question, cannot be accepted, at this stage, as the surrounding circumstances of the incident raise doubts that ca only be clarified during the course of trial. 7. investigation was carried out and challan 27.01.2026 examined till date. Indubitably, the petitioner is involved in the FIR in question pertaining to commercial quantity of 2 1985. From the rival submissions as also the material brought forth before Court, no cause meet with the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act nature. Reference in this regard can be made to the judgment Hon’ble Supreme Court title Nakade, Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.9792/2025 Vigin K. Varghese, Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No(s).7768 of 2025 State of Punjab versus Sukhwinder Singh @ Gora, Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.5020/2026 7.1. period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner contraband recovered, is not sufficient to grant the concession of regular bail as well. A profitable reference in this regard can be made to the judgment(s) of the Hon’ble Supreme Court titled as -32769-2026 grant of regular bail to the petitioner, especially in light of the recovery of commercial quantity of the contraband. The Court cannot accept the plea of the false implication of the petitioner merely based on bald asser by any cogent material. The argument of the learned counsel that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question, cannot be accepted, at this stage, as the surrounding circumstances of the incident raise doubts that ca only be clarified during the course of trial. The petitioner was arrested on investigation was carried out and challan qua 27.01.2026. Out of total 16 cited prosecution witnesses, none has been examined till date. Indubitably, the petitioner is involved in the FIR in question pertaining to commercial quantity of 280 Kgs 1985. From the rival submissions as also the material brought forth before , no cause nay plausible cause is made out in favour of the petitioner to meet with the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act nature. Reference in this regard can be made to the judgment Hon’ble Supreme Court titled as Union of Nakade, Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.9792/2025 Vigin K. Varghese, Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No(s).7768 of 2025 State of Punjab versus Sukhwinder Singh @ Gora, Special Leave to Appeal .5020/2026. Furthermore, the petitioner is in custody since 02.08.2025 period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner contraband recovered, is not sufficient to grant the concession of regular bail as profitable reference in this regard can be made to the judgment(s) of the Hon’ble Supreme Court titled as State of Punjab vs. Sukhwinder Singh @ 3 grant of regular bail to the petitioner, especially in light of the recovery of commercial quantity of the contraband. The Court cannot accept the plea of the merely based on bald assertions unsupported by any cogent material. The argument of the learned counsel that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question, cannot be accepted, at this stage, as the surrounding circumstances of the incident raise doubts that ca The petitioner was arrested on 02.08.2025 whereinafter qua the petitioner was presented on 6 cited prosecution witnesses, none has been examined till date. Indubitably, the petitioner is involved in the FIR in question 80 Kgs of poppy husk as per NDPS Act, 1985. From the rival submissions as also the material brought forth before this plausible cause is made out in favour of the petitioner to meet with the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act which is mandatory in nature. Reference in this regard can be made to the judgment(s) passed by the Union of India versus Namdeo Ashruba Nakade, Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.9792/2025; Union of India versus Vigin K. Varghese, Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No(s).7768 of 2025 and State of Punjab versus Sukhwinder Singh @ Gora, Special Leave to Appeal Furthermore, the petitioner is in custody since 02.08.2025. The period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner vis.-a-vis., the quantity of contraband recovered, is not sufficient to grant the concession of regular bail as profitable reference in this regard can be made to the judgment(s) of State of Punjab vs. Sukhwinder Singh @ grant of regular bail to the petitioner, especially in light of the recovery of commercial quantity of the contraband. The Court cannot accept the plea of the tions unsupported by any cogent material. The argument of the learned counsel that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question, cannot be accepted, at this stage, as the surrounding circumstances of the incident raise doubts that can whereinafter the petitioner was presented on 6 cited prosecution witnesses, none has been examined till date. Indubitably, the petitioner is involved in the FIR in question as per NDPS Act, this plausible cause is made out in favour of the petitioner to which is mandatory in passed by the India versus Namdeo Ashruba Union of India versus and State of Punjab versus Sukhwinder Singh @ Gora, Special Leave to Appeal . The the quantity of contraband recovered, is not sufficient to grant the concession of regular bail as profitable reference in this regard can be made to the judgment(s) of State of Punjab vs. Sukhwinder Singh @ AJAY KUMAR 2026.07.16 17:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- Gora = 2026 INSC 411 INSC 618. 8. extended the concession of Court, but the said co as he was implicated into the FIR in question primarily on the ba disclosure statement of co from the vehicle in question from which the contraband in question was effected. 9. case in hand; especiall commercial in nature, likelihood of the petitioner going process of justice & antecedents of the petitioner, which reflect other FIR(s) against him; the petition in hand deserves to be 10. 11. opinion on the merits of the case. 12. application, if any, shall also stands disposed off. July 15, 202 Ajay -32769-2026 Gora = 2026 INSC 411 and State of Punjab vs. Balraj Singh @ Billa = 2026 INSC 618. Further, though co-accused, namely, extended the concession of anticipatory bail by Court, but the said co-accused appears to have been extended such concession as he was implicated into the FIR in question primarily on the ba disclosure statement of co-accused whereas the petitioner was apprehended from the vehicle in question from which the contraband in question was Hence, keeping in view the entirety of the factual case in hand; especially the contraband alleged to be recovered being commercial in nature, likelihood of the petitioner going process of justice & also interfere with the prosecution witnesses/ evidence and antecedents of the petitioner, which reflect other FIR(s) against him; the petition in hand deserves to be dismissed. Ordered accordingly. Nothing said hereinabove shall be construed opinion on the merits of the case. Since the main case has been decided, pending miscellaneous application, if any, shall also stands disposed off. 2026 Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable: 4 State of Punjab vs. Balraj Singh @ Billa = 2026 used, namely, Hardeep Singh has been bail by the Coordinate Bench of this appears to have been extended such concession as he was implicated into the FIR in question primarily on the basis of accused whereas the petitioner was apprehended from the vehicle in question from which the contraband in question was Hence, keeping in view the entirety of the factual milieu of the y the contraband alleged to be recovered being commercial in nature, likelihood of the petitioner going to abscond from the also interfere with the prosecution witnesses/ evidence and antecedents of the petitioner, which reflect other FIR(s) against him; the Nothing said hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of Since the main case has been decided, pending miscellaneous application, if any, shall also stands disposed off. (SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No State of Punjab vs. Balraj Singh @ Billa = 2026 has been the Coordinate Bench of this appears to have been extended such concession sis of accused whereas the petitioner was apprehended from the vehicle in question from which the contraband in question was of the y the contraband alleged to be recovered being abscond from the also interfere with the prosecution witnesses/ evidence and antecedents of the petitioner, which reflect other FIR(s) against him; the as an expression of Since the main case has been decided, pending miscellaneous AJAY KUMAR 2026.07.16 17:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document