CRM-M-28751 CRM-M-39638 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA 208 CRM-M-28751 RAKESH KUMAR STATE OF CRM-M-39638 PARMOD KUMAR STATE OF U.T. CHANDIGARH CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Present: RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL, J. (ORAL) 1. Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 are being adjudicated, as both arise out of the same FIR. Since the facts of both the petitions are identical, hence to avoid repetition, the same are taken from 28751-2025 WITH 39638-2025 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 28751-2025 RAKESH KUMAR Versus STATE OF U.T. CHANDIGARH AND 39638-2025 PARMOD KUMAR Versus STATE OF U.T. CHANDIGARH HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Mr. P.S. Ahluwalia, Senior Advocate with Mr. Deepinder Singh Virk, Advocate, for the petitioner in CRM-M-28751 Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate for Mr. Gagandeep Goel, Advocate for the petitioner in CRM-M-39638 Mr. Manish Bansal, P.P. UT Chandigarh. ***** RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL, J. (ORAL) By this common order, both the aforesaid petitions filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 are being adjudicated, as both arise out of the same FIR. Since the facts of both the petitions are identical, hence to avoid repetition, the same are taken from CRM IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-28751-2025 WITH CRM-M-39638-2025 Date of decision: 06.02.2026 ….Petitioner ....Respondent ….Petitioner ....Respondent HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Mr. P.S. Ahluwalia, Senior Advocate with Singh Virk, Advocate, 28751-2025. Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate for 39638-2025 Mr. Manish Bansal, P.P. UT Chandigarh. By this common order, both the aforesaid petitions filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 are being adjudicated, as both arise out of the same FIR. Since the facts of both the petitions are identical, hence to CRM-M-28751-2025. By this common order, both the aforesaid petitions filed under the same FIR. Since the facts of both the petitions are identical, hence to GURPREET 2026.02.09 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-28751 CRM-M-39638 2. SI Ravdeep Singh, along with other police officials, was on patrolling duty and, on suspicion, apprehended the petitioners while they were coming out of Ganesh Studio c Cough Syrup were recovered from the carton. On further inspection of the premises (Ganesh Studio) Recodex-T Cough Syrup were the present case is 1,423 bottles of Recodex present FIR was lodged against the petitioner. 3. 2025 submits that submits that the petitioner is a licenced wholesale drug distributor operating in the name of M/s Rakesh Medicos and he has Studio. The said premises belongs to one Sunil Sharma who Dalip Sharma, proprietor of has no business relationship or partnership with either individual or premises in question. He further submits that the story of the prosecution appears only untenable and fails to inspire confidence. He argues that the co Hardik Vinu Bhai Borad has been granted the concession of bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 19.05.2025. custody since 29.05.2024, the investigation in charges have been framed and out of 31 prosecution witnesses none have been examined and as such the conclusion of trial will take considerable long time since the petitioner has already suffered the agony of prolonged 28751-2025 WITH 39638-2025 -2- Brief facts, as per the prosecution case, are that on 29.05.2024, SI Ravdeep Singh, along with other police officials, was on patrolling duty and, on suspicion, apprehended the petitioners while they were coming out of Ganesh Studio carrying a carton. Upon checking, 23 bottles of Recodex Cough Syrup were recovered from the carton. On further inspection of the (Ganesh Studio), 14 cartons containing 100 bottles each of T Cough Syrup were further recovered. Thus, the to the present case is 1,423 bottles of Recodex present FIR was lodged against the petitioner. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner in CRM submits that he has been falsely implicated in the present case. submits that the petitioner is a licenced wholesale drug distributor operating in the name of M/s Rakesh Medicos and he has Studio. The said premises belongs to one Sunil Sharma who lip Sharma, proprietor of M/s Maa Shakumbri Chemists no business relationship or partnership with either individual or premises He further submits that the story of the prosecution appears only able and fails to inspire confidence. He argues that the co Hardik Vinu Bhai Borad has been granted the concession of bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 19.05.2025. custody since 29.05.2024, the investigation in charges have been framed and out of 31 prosecution witnesses none have been examined and as such the conclusion of trial will take considerable since the petitioner has already suffered the agony of prolonged Brief facts, as per the prosecution case, are that on 29.05.2024, SI Ravdeep Singh, along with other police officials, was on patrolling duty and, on suspicion, apprehended the petitioners while they were coming out arrying a carton. Upon checking, 23 bottles of Recodex-T Cough Syrup were recovered from the carton. On further inspection of the , 14 cartons containing 100 bottles each of recovered. Thus, the total recovery in the present case is 1,423 bottles of Recodex-T Cough Syrup. Hence, the present FIR was lodged against the petitioner. counsel for the petitioner in CRM-M-28751- been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that the petitioner is a licenced wholesale drug distributor operating in the name of M/s Rakesh Medicos and he has no connection with Ganesh Studio. The said premises belongs to one Sunil Sharma who is the brother of Maa Shakumbri Chemists and the petitioner no business relationship or partnership with either individual or premises He further submits that the story of the prosecution appears only able and fails to inspire confidence. He argues that the co-accused Hardik Vinu Bhai Borad has been granted the concession of bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 19.05.2025. The petitioner is in custody since 29.05.2024, the investigation in the present case is complete, charges have been framed and out of 31 prosecution witnesses none have been examined and as such the conclusion of trial will take considerable since the petitioner has already suffered the agony of prolonged Brief facts, as per the prosecution case, are that on 29.05.2024, SI Ravdeep Singh, along with other police officials, was on patrolling duty and, on suspicion, apprehended the petitioners while they were coming out T Cough Syrup were recovered from the carton. On further inspection of the , 14 cartons containing 100 bottles each of tal recovery in T Cough Syrup. Hence, the - He submits that the petitioner is a licenced wholesale drug distributor operating no connection with Ganesh is the brother of and the petitioner no business relationship or partnership with either individual or premises He further submits that the story of the prosecution appears only accused Hardik Vinu Bhai Borad has been granted the concession of bail by the The petitioner is in the present case is complete, charges have been framed and out of 31 prosecution witnesses none have been examined and as such the conclusion of trial will take considerable since the petitioner has already suffered the agony of prolonged GURPREET 2026.02.09 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-28751 CRM-M-39638 custody during trial the petitioner be granted the concession of bail. 4. adopts the submissions made by the learned Senior counsel and submits that the mandatory provisions of NDPS Act were not complied with the petitioner is entitled to grant of regular bail. He further submits that nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner and he has been in custody since 29.05.2024. Hence, he pray concession of bail prolonged custody during trial 5. referring to the status report, has contended the petitioner the petitioner Rakesh Kumar admitted that he had purchased the contraband from co-accused Hardik Vinu Bhai Borad. He further submits that the said co-accused in his disclosure statement stated that Cough Syrup to the petitioner under the license of Rakesh Medicos and subsequently the petitioner placed another through WhatsApp using the license of M/s Maa Shakumbri Chemist firm. He further submits that during investigation, the proprietors of M/s Maa Shakumbri Chemists namely joined in investigation and they submitted that they had shut down their chemist shop in December 2021 and sold the remaining stock to petitioner Rakesh Kumar along with license documents and officials stamp of M/s Maa 28751-2025 WITH 39638-2025 -3- y during trial. Hence, he prays that the present petition be allowed and the petitioner be granted the concession of bail. Learned counsel for the petitioner in CRM adopts the submissions made by the learned Senior counsel and submits that the mandatory provisions of NDPS Act were not complied with the petitioner is entitled to grant of regular bail. He further submits that nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner and he has been in custody since 29.05.2024. Hence, he prays that the petitioner be granted the concession of bail since the petitioner has already suffered the agony of prolonged custody during trial. Opposing the prayer for bail, learned counsel for the State, by referring to the status report, has contended the petitioners is serious in nature. He submits that the petitioner Rakesh Kumar admitted that he had purchased the contraband accused Hardik Vinu Bhai Borad. He further submits that the said accused in his disclosure statement stated that Cough Syrup to the petitioner under the license of Rakesh Medicos and subsequently the petitioner placed another through WhatsApp using the license of M/s Maa Shakumbri Chemists claiming that it’s his sister concern firm. He further submits that during investigation, the proprietors of M/s Maa Shakumbri Chemists namely Dalip Sharma and Rajesh Kumar were joined in investigation and they submitted that they had shut down their chemist shop in December 2021 and sold the remaining stock to petitioner Rakesh Kumar along with license documents and officials stamp of M/s Maa . Hence, he prays that the present petition be allowed and the petitioner be granted the concession of bail. Learned counsel for the petitioner in CRM-M-39638-2025 adopts the submissions made by the learned Senior counsel and submits that the mandatory provisions of NDPS Act were not complied with and as such the petitioner is entitled to grant of regular bail. He further submits that nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner and he has been in custody s that the petitioner be granted the since the petitioner has already suffered the agony of Opposing the prayer for bail, learned counsel for the State, by referring to the status report, has contended that the offence committed by e submits that during the investigation the petitioner Rakesh Kumar admitted that he had purchased the contraband accused Hardik Vinu Bhai Borad. He further submits that the said accused in his disclosure statement stated that he initially sold Recodex-T Cough Syrup to the petitioner under the license of Rakesh Medicos and subsequently the petitioner placed another through WhatsApp using the s claiming that it’s his sister concern firm. He further submits that during investigation, the proprietors of M/s Sharma and Rajesh Kumar were joined in investigation and they submitted that they had shut down their chemist shop in December 2021 and sold the remaining stock to petitioner Rakesh Kumar along with license documents and officials stamp of M/s Maa . Hence, he prays that the present petition be allowed and 2025 adopts the submissions made by the learned Senior counsel and submits that and as such the petitioner is entitled to grant of regular bail. He further submits that nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner and he has been in custody s that the petitioner be granted the since the petitioner has already suffered the agony of Opposing the prayer for bail, learned counsel for the State, by that the offence committed by during the investigation the petitioner Rakesh Kumar admitted that he had purchased the contraband accused Hardik Vinu Bhai Borad. He further submits that the said T Cough Syrup to the petitioner under the license of Rakesh Medicos and subsequently the petitioner placed another through WhatsApp using the s claiming that it’s his sister concern firm. He further submits that during investigation, the proprietors of M/s Sharma and Rajesh Kumar were joined in investigation and they submitted that they had shut down their chemist shop in December 2021 and sold the remaining stock to petitioner Rakesh Kumar along with license documents and officials stamp of M/s Maa GURPREET 2026.02.09 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-28751 CRM-M-39638 Shakumbri Chemists. However, after selling the stock the petitioner neither returned the license and nor the stamp and of the offence. He contends that the petitioners have knowingly and unlawfully used the trade license and stamp o Chemists, procured and possessed large quantity of Recodex Syrup, which falls under commercial quantity controvert the fact that the co granted bail by the Hon’ble Su are not at parity with the said co and he was named in the disclosure statement of the present petitioner. Hence, he submits that the present petition be dismissed. 6. perusing the record of the case, it is evident that the allegations against the petitioners are grave and serious in nature as spot with the alleged contraband. judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court wherein the co Bhai Borad has been granted the concession of bail will not cut the ice as the petitioners are not at parity with the said co so far it is evident that the petitioners under well planned conspiracy has misused the license of M/s Maa Shakumbri Chemists and possessed large quantity of Recodex commercial quantity. of their prolonged custody. It is trite law that mere prolonged period of custody or the fact that the trial is likely to take time by itself or coupled with the period of incarceration are not sufficient grounds f 28751-2025 WITH 39638-2025 -4- ri Chemists. However, after selling the stock the petitioner neither returned the license and nor the stamp and misused the same in commission of the offence. He contends that the petitioners have knowingly and unlawfully used the trade license and stamp o Chemists, procured and possessed large quantity of Recodex , which falls under commercial quantity controvert the fact that the co-accused Hardik Vinu Bhai Borad has been granted bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. He submits that the petitioners are not at parity with the said co-accused as nothing was recovered from him and he was named in the disclosure statement of the present petitioner. Hence, he submits that the present petition be dismissed. Having heard learned counsel for the parties perusing the record of the case, it is evident that the allegations against the are grave and serious in nature as spot with the alleged contraband. The reliance of the petitioners upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court wherein the co Bhai Borad has been granted the concession of bail will not cut the ice as the petitioners are not at parity with the said co- so far it is evident that the petitioners under well planned conspiracy has misused the license of M/s Maa Shakumbri Chemists and possessed large quantity of Recodex-T Cough Syrup which falls under commercial quantity. The petitioners are seeking bail mainly on the ground prolonged custody. It is trite law that mere prolonged period of custody or the fact that the trial is likely to take time by itself or coupled with the period of incarceration are not sufficient grounds f ri Chemists. However, after selling the stock the petitioner neither misused the same in commission of the offence. He contends that the petitioners have knowingly and unlawfully used the trade license and stamp of M/s Maa Shakumbri Chemists, procured and possessed large quantity of Recodex-T Cough , which falls under commercial quantity. He however could not accused Hardik Vinu Bhai Borad has been preme Court. He submits that the petitioners accused as nothing was recovered from him and he was named in the disclosure statement of the present petitioner. Hence, he submits that the present petition be dismissed. for the parties at length and after perusing the record of the case, it is evident that the allegations against the are grave and serious in nature as they were apprehended at the The reliance of the petitioners upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court wherein the co-accused Hardik Vinu Bhai Borad has been granted the concession of bail will not cut the ice as the -accused. From the investigation so far it is evident that the petitioners under well planned conspiracy has misused the license of M/s Maa Shakumbri Chemists and procured and T Cough Syrup which falls under seeking bail mainly on the ground prolonged custody. It is trite law that mere prolonged period of custody or the fact that the trial is likely to take time by itself or coupled with the period of incarceration are not sufficient grounds for enlarging an ri Chemists. However, after selling the stock the petitioner neither misused the same in commission of the offence. He contends that the petitioners have knowingly and f M/s Maa Shakumbri T Cough . He however could not accused Hardik Vinu Bhai Borad has been preme Court. He submits that the petitioners accused as nothing was recovered from him and he was named in the disclosure statement of the present petitioner. at length and after perusing the record of the case, it is evident that the allegations against the they were apprehended at the The reliance of the petitioners upon the accused Hardik Vinu Bhai Borad has been granted the concession of bail will not cut the ice as the vestigation so far it is evident that the petitioners under well planned conspiracy has procured and T Cough Syrup which falls under seeking bail mainly on the ground prolonged custody. It is trite law that mere prolonged period of custody or the fact that the trial is likely to take time by itself or coupled or enlarging an GURPREET 2026.02.09 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-28751 CRM-M-39638 accused on bail, when the offence alleged is serious. Reference in this context can be had to the observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kalyan Chandra Sarkar v. Rajesh Ranjan @ AIR(SC) 1866 (2007) 1 SCC 242 RCR (Criminal) 280(SC) 7. against the petitioner operandi of the petitioners conviction may entail and the attendant facts and circumstances but without meaning to make any comment upon the merits thereof, considered opinion that 8. dismissed. 9. connected case(s). 06.02.2026 Gurpreet 28751-2025 WITH 39638-2025 -5- accused on bail, when the offence alleged is serious. Reference in this context can be had to the observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court Kalyan Chandra Sarkar v. Rajesh Ranjan @ AIR(SC) 1866, Chenna Boyanna Krishna Yadav v. State of Maharashtra, (2007) 1 SCC 242 and State through CBI v. Amaramani Tripathi, 2005 (4) RCR (Criminal) 280(SC). Keeping in view the gravity of the allegations as levelled against the petitioners, quantity of recovery of of the petitioners coupled with the quantum of sentence which the conviction may entail and the attendant facts and circumstances but without meaning to make any comment upon the merits thereof, dered opinion that both the petitions does not deserve to be allowed. Accordingly, both the petitions A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of other connected case(s). i) Whether speaking/reasoned? ii) Whether reportable? accused on bail, when the offence alleged is serious. Reference in this context can be had to the observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court Kalyan Chandra Sarkar v. Rajesh Ranjan @ Pappu Yadav, 2004 shna Yadav v. State of Maharashtra, State through CBI v. Amaramani Tripathi, 2005 (4) Keeping in view the gravity of the allegations as levelled recovery of the contraband, the modus coupled with the quantum of sentence which the conviction may entail and the attendant facts and circumstances but without meaning to make any comment upon the merits thereof, this Court is of the does not deserve to be allowed. s being bereft of any merit, are A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of other (RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No accused on bail, when the offence alleged is serious. Reference in this context can be had to the observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court Yadav, 2004 shna Yadav v. State of Maharashtra, State through CBI v. Amaramani Tripathi, 2005 (4) Keeping in view the gravity of the allegations as levelled modus coupled with the quantum of sentence which the conviction may entail and the attendant facts and circumstances but without this Court is of the are A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of other (RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL) GURPREET 2026.02.09 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document.