CRM-M-63079- 116 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Sabaj Singh State of Punjab CORAM : HON'BLE MS Present: Mr. Ms. Harleen Kaur, Mr. Sahil Chowdhary, AAG Punjab. MANDEEP PANNU J. 1. The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, praying for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No. 142 dated 31.12.2024, registered under Sections 21(C), 61, and 85 of the NDPS Act, 1 Taran, Punjab. 2. As per the prosecution version, on 31.12.2024 the police party, while patrolling in search of bad elements near Railway Crossing, Khemkaran, received a secret information that the Bakhshish Singh, had links with Pakistani smugglers and was engaged in procuring heroin from across the border and supplying the same in Tarn Taran and other districts of Punjab. It was further informed that he was pre Market, Khemkaran, sitting in his Figo car and waiting for customers, and if a raid -2025 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -.- CRM Date of Decision : VERSUS HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU Mr. Jasdeep S. Gill, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Harleen Kaur, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sahil Chowdhary, AAG Punjab. -.- MANDEEP PANNU J. (Oral) The present first petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, praying for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No. 142 dated 31.12.2024, registered under Sections 21(C), 61, and 85 of the NDPS Act, 1985, at Police Station Khemkaran, District Tarn As per the prosecution version, on 31.12.2024 the police party, while patrolling in search of bad elements near Railway Crossing, Khemkaran, received a secret information that the present petitioner shish Singh, had links with Pakistani smugglers and was engaged in procuring heroin from across the border and supplying the same in Tarn Taran and other districts of Punjab. It was further informed that he was pre Market, Khemkaran, sitting in his Figo car and waiting for customers, and if a raid -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-63079-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision : 23.02.2026 ....Petitioner ....Respondent MANDEEP PANNU , Sr. Advocate with Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sahil Chowdhary, AAG Punjab. present first petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, praying for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No. 142 dated 31.12.2024, registered under Sections 21(C), 985, at Police Station Khemkaran, District Tarn As per the prosecution version, on 31.12.2024 the police party, while patrolling in search of bad elements near Railway Crossing, Khemkaran, received etitioner-accused Sabaj Singh, son of shish Singh, had links with Pakistani smugglers and was engaged in procuring heroin from across the border and supplying the same in Tarn Taran and other districts of Punjab. It was further informed that he was present in Grain Market, Khemkaran, sitting in his Figo car and waiting for customers, and if a raid present first petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, praying for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No. 142 dated 31.12.2024, registered under Sections 21(C), 985, at Police Station Khemkaran, District Tarn As per the prosecution version, on 31.12.2024 the police party, while patrolling in search of bad elements near Railway Crossing, Khemkaran, received accused Sabaj Singh, son of shish Singh, had links with Pakistani smugglers and was engaged in procuring heroin from across the border and supplying the same in Tarn Taran and sent in Grain Market, Khemkaran, sitting in his Figo car and waiting for customers, and if a raid TRIPTI SAINI 2026.02.23 17:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-63079- was conducted, he could be apprehended along with a large quantity of contraband. Acting upon the said information, the police party reached Grain Market, Khemkaran, where one person was seen sitting inside a silver without a number plate. He was apprehended and disclosed his name as Sabaj Singh (present petitoiner polythene envelope con from his possession. 3. Learned that there exists a serious lacuna in the case of the prosecution which strikes at the very root of the mat of 1 kilogram 10 the mandatory procedural safeguards prescribed under the provisions of the NDPS Act have not been complied wi was not properly informed of the grounds of arrest at the time of his apprehension, nor were specific and actionable reasons supplied to him as required by law. 4. Counsel further submits that such om violation of the mandatory provisions of Section 51(2) of the NDPS Act, which casts a statutory obligation upon the investigating agency to communicate the grounds of arrest to the accused in a meaningful and intelligible manner. argued that compliance with these provisions is not a mere formality but a substantive safeguard intended to protect the constitutional rights of the accused, and non-compliance thereof vitiates the arrest itself. failure of the prosecution to adhere to these mandatory requirements renders the entire prosecution case doubtful and legally unsustainable. On this solitary ground alone, the petitioner claims entitlement to the concession of bail, as continued -2025 (O&M) was conducted, he could be apprehended along with a large quantity of contraband. Acting upon the said information, the police party reached Grain Market, mkaran, where one person was seen sitting inside a silver without a number plate. He was apprehended and disclosed his name as Sabaj present petitoiner-accused). Upon personal search of the polythene envelope containing 1 kilogram and 104 grams of heroin was recovered from his possession. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that there exists a serious lacuna in the case of the prosecution which strikes at the very root of the matter. It is argued that although the prosecution alleges recovery of 1 kilogram 104 grams of heroin from the conscious possession of the petitioner, the mandatory procedural safeguards prescribed under the provisions of the NDPS Act have not been complied with. In particular, it is submitted that the petitioner was not properly informed of the grounds of arrest at the time of his apprehension, nor were specific and actionable reasons supplied to him as required by law. Counsel further submits that such om violation of the mandatory provisions of Section 51(2) of the NDPS Act, which casts a statutory obligation upon the investigating agency to communicate the grounds of arrest to the accused in a meaningful and intelligible manner. argued that compliance with these provisions is not a mere formality but a substantive safeguard intended to protect the constitutional rights of the accused, compliance thereof vitiates the arrest itself. re of the prosecution to adhere to these mandatory requirements renders the entire prosecution case doubtful and legally unsustainable. On this solitary ground alone, the petitioner claims entitlement to the concession of bail, as continued -2- was conducted, he could be apprehended along with a large quantity of contraband. Acting upon the said information, the police party reached Grain Market, mkaran, where one person was seen sitting inside a silver-coloured Figo car without a number plate. He was apprehended and disclosed his name as Sabaj accused). Upon personal search of the said accused, one taining 1 kilogram and 104 grams of heroin was recovered counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that there exists a serious lacuna in the case of the prosecution which strikes at the ter. It is argued that although the prosecution alleges recovery grams of heroin from the conscious possession of the petitioner, the mandatory procedural safeguards prescribed under the provisions of the NDPS th. In particular, it is submitted that the petitioner was not properly informed of the grounds of arrest at the time of his apprehension, nor were specific and actionable reasons supplied to him as required by law. Counsel further submits that such omission constitutes a clear violation of the mandatory provisions of Section 51(2) of the NDPS Act, which casts a statutory obligation upon the investigating agency to communicate the grounds of arrest to the accused in a meaningful and intelligible manner. It is argued that compliance with these provisions is not a mere formality but a substantive safeguard intended to protect the constitutional rights of the accused, compliance thereof vitiates the arrest itself. It is thus contended that the re of the prosecution to adhere to these mandatory requirements renders the entire prosecution case doubtful and legally unsustainable. On this solitary ground alone, the petitioner claims entitlement to the concession of bail, as continued was conducted, he could be apprehended along with a large quantity of contraband. Acting upon the said information, the police party reached Grain Market, coloured Figo car without a number plate. He was apprehended and disclosed his name as Sabaj accused, one taining 1 kilogram and 104 grams of heroin was recovered counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that there exists a serious lacuna in the case of the prosecution which strikes at the ter. It is argued that although the prosecution alleges recovery grams of heroin from the conscious possession of the petitioner, the mandatory procedural safeguards prescribed under the provisions of the NDPS th. In particular, it is submitted that the petitioner was not properly informed of the grounds of arrest at the time of his apprehension, ission constitutes a clear violation of the mandatory provisions of Section 51(2) of the NDPS Act, which casts a statutory obligation upon the investigating agency to communicate the It is argued that compliance with these provisions is not a mere formality but a substantive safeguard intended to protect the constitutional rights of the accused, It is thus contended that the re of the prosecution to adhere to these mandatory requirements renders the entire prosecution case doubtful and legally unsustainable. On this solitary ground alone, the petitioner claims entitlement to the concession of bail, as continued TRIPTI SAINI 2026.02.23 17:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-63079- custody in the face of such procedural illegality would amount to infringement of his statutory and constitutional rights. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel has opposed the prayer for regular bail and submitted that the petitioner is not entitled to the conces bail as a heavy commercial quantity of contraband has been recovered from his conscious possession. It is contended that the arrest memo (Annexure P demonstrates that the grounds of arrest were duly apprised to the accused at the time of arrest. The memo specifically records that the petitioner was informed about the offences alleged against him in consonance with the directions issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in 610, and that he was told pointed out that the arrest memo contains a question communication of relevant particulars to the accused, thereby evidencing compliance with mandatory safeguards. It is requirements stand satisfied and, in any case, the issue sought to be raised by the petitioner pertains to disputed questions of fact which can only be adjudicated during trial. Therefore, it is submitted that no ground for at this stage. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with their able assistance. 7. At the outset, it is pertinent to note that the recovery effected in the present case is of 1 kilogram 10 the category of commercial quantity under the NDPS Act. The alleged recovery has been effected from t involved is substantial and grave, and the rigours of the statutory restrictions -2025 (O&M) face of such procedural illegality would amount to infringement of his statutory and constitutional rights. On the other hand, learned State counsel has opposed the prayer for regular bail and submitted that the petitioner is not entitled to the conces bail as a heavy commercial quantity of contraband has been recovered from his conscious possession. It is contended that the arrest memo (Annexure P demonstrates that the grounds of arrest were duly apprised to the accused at the arrest. The memo specifically records that the petitioner was informed about the offences alleged against him in consonance with the directions issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in D.K. Basu vs. State of West Bengal , and that he was told that he was being arrested in the present FIR. It is further pointed out that the arrest memo contains a question communication of relevant particulars to the accused, thereby evidencing compliance with mandatory safeguards. It is requirements stand satisfied and, in any case, the issue sought to be raised by the petitioner pertains to disputed questions of fact which can only be adjudicated during trial. Therefore, it is submitted that no ground for I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with their able assistance. At the outset, it is pertinent to note that the recovery effected in the present case is of 1 kilogram 104 grams of heroin, which indisputably falls within the category of commercial quantity under the NDPS Act. The alleged recovery has been effected from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The quantity involved is substantial and grave, and the rigours of the statutory restrictions -3- face of such procedural illegality would amount to infringement of On the other hand, learned State counsel has opposed the prayer for regular bail and submitted that the petitioner is not entitled to the concession of bail as a heavy commercial quantity of contraband has been recovered from his conscious possession. It is contended that the arrest memo (Annexure P-3) clearly demonstrates that the grounds of arrest were duly apprised to the accused at the arrest. The memo specifically records that the petitioner was informed about the offences alleged against him in consonance with the directions issued by D.K. Basu vs. State of West Bengal AIR 1997 SC that he was being arrested in the present FIR. It is further pointed out that the arrest memo contains a question-answer format reflecting communication of relevant particulars to the accused, thereby evidencing compliance with mandatory safeguards. It is thus argued that the procedural requirements stand satisfied and, in any case, the issue sought to be raised by the petitioner pertains to disputed questions of fact which can only be adjudicated during trial. Therefore, it is submitted that no ground for grant of bail is made out I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record At the outset, it is pertinent to note that the recovery effected in the grams of heroin, which indisputably falls within the category of commercial quantity under the NDPS Act. The alleged recovery he conscious possession of the petitioner. The quantity involved is substantial and grave, and the rigours of the statutory restrictions face of such procedural illegality would amount to infringement of On the other hand, learned State counsel has opposed the prayer for sion of bail as a heavy commercial quantity of contraband has been recovered from his 3) clearly demonstrates that the grounds of arrest were duly apprised to the accused at the arrest. The memo specifically records that the petitioner was informed about the offences alleged against him in consonance with the directions issued by AIR 1997 SC that he was being arrested in the present FIR. It is further answer format reflecting communication of relevant particulars to the accused, thereby evidencing thus argued that the procedural requirements stand satisfied and, in any case, the issue sought to be raised by the petitioner pertains to disputed questions of fact which can only be adjudicated grant of bail is made out I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record At the outset, it is pertinent to note that the recovery effected in the grams of heroin, which indisputably falls within the category of commercial quantity under the NDPS Act. The alleged recovery he conscious possession of the petitioner. The quantity involved is substantial and grave, and the rigours of the statutory restrictions TRIPTI SAINI 2026.02.23 17:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-63079- governing bail in cases involving commercial quantity are therefore attracted. The seriousness of the allegations and t offences are relevant considerations which cannot be ignored while adjudicating a prayer for regular bail. 8. So far as the argument raised regarding alleged non grounds of arrest is concerned prima facie indicates that the petitioner was duly informed of the grounds of arrest. The memo specifically records that he was intimated about the offences alleged against him and about his arrest in the pre directions issued in and answers in the arrest memo further indicates that the petitioner was apprised of the relevant particulars and procedural safeguards at th stage, the document cannot be discarded or disbelieved, and whether the compliance was adequate or not is essentially a matter of evidence which can only be tested during trial after appreciation of oral and documentary evidence. disputed factual issues cannot be conclusively determined in proceedings for grant of bail. 9. Moreover, the recovery being of commercial quantity, the statutory embargo and strict parameters governing grant of bail in such offences must be kept in view. No material has been brought on record at this stage to satisfy the Court that the petitioner is prima facie not guilty of the offence alleged or that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. In the absence of such satisfaction, the petitioner does not qualify for the exceptional relief of regular bail. 10. In view of the gravity of allegations, the nature and quantity of contraband recovered, and the prima facie compliance reflected in the arrest -2025 (O&M) governing bail in cases involving commercial quantity are therefore attracted. The seriousness of the allegations and the severity of punishment prescribed for such offences are relevant considerations which cannot be ignored while adjudicating a prayer for regular bail. So far as the argument raised regarding alleged non grounds of arrest is concerned, a perusal of the arrest memo placed on record prima facie indicates that the petitioner was duly informed of the grounds of arrest. The memo specifically records that he was intimated about the offences alleged against him and about his arrest in the present FIR, in conformity with the directions issued in D.K. Basu’s case (supra). The presence of recorded questions and answers in the arrest memo further indicates that the petitioner was apprised of the relevant particulars and procedural safeguards at th stage, the document cannot be discarded or disbelieved, and whether the compliance was adequate or not is essentially a matter of evidence which can only be tested during trial after appreciation of oral and documentary evidence. disputed factual issues cannot be conclusively determined in proceedings for grant Moreover, the recovery being of commercial quantity, the statutory embargo and strict parameters governing grant of bail in such offences must be iew. No material has been brought on record at this stage to satisfy the Court that the petitioner is prima facie not guilty of the offence alleged or that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. In the absence of such satisfaction, ioner does not qualify for the exceptional relief of regular bail. In view of the gravity of allegations, the nature and quantity of contraband recovered, and the prima facie compliance reflected in the arrest -4- governing bail in cases involving commercial quantity are therefore attracted. The he severity of punishment prescribed for such offences are relevant considerations which cannot be ignored while adjudicating a So far as the argument raised regarding alleged non-communication of , a perusal of the arrest memo placed on record prima facie indicates that the petitioner was duly informed of the grounds of arrest. The memo specifically records that he was intimated about the offences alleged sent FIR, in conformity with the . The presence of recorded questions and answers in the arrest memo further indicates that the petitioner was apprised of the relevant particulars and procedural safeguards at the time of arrest. At this stage, the document cannot be discarded or disbelieved, and whether the compliance was adequate or not is essentially a matter of evidence which can only be tested during trial after appreciation of oral and documentary evidence. Such disputed factual issues cannot be conclusively determined in proceedings for grant Moreover, the recovery being of commercial quantity, the statutory embargo and strict parameters governing grant of bail in such offences must be iew. No material has been brought on record at this stage to satisfy the Court that the petitioner is prima facie not guilty of the offence alleged or that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. In the absence of such satisfaction, ioner does not qualify for the exceptional relief of regular bail. In view of the gravity of allegations, the nature and quantity of contraband recovered, and the prima facie compliance reflected in the arrest governing bail in cases involving commercial quantity are therefore attracted. The he severity of punishment prescribed for such offences are relevant considerations which cannot be ignored while adjudicating a communication of , a perusal of the arrest memo placed on record prima facie indicates that the petitioner was duly informed of the grounds of arrest. The memo specifically records that he was intimated about the offences alleged sent FIR, in conformity with the . The presence of recorded questions and answers in the arrest memo further indicates that the petitioner was apprised of e time of arrest. At this stage, the document cannot be discarded or disbelieved, and whether the compliance was adequate or not is essentially a matter of evidence which can only Such disputed factual issues cannot be conclusively determined in proceedings for grant Moreover, the recovery being of commercial quantity, the statutory embargo and strict parameters governing grant of bail in such offences must be iew. No material has been brought on record at this stage to satisfy the Court that the petitioner is prima facie not guilty of the offence alleged or that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. In the absence of such satisfaction, In view of the gravity of allegations, the nature and quantity of contraband recovered, and the prima facie compliance reflected in the arrest TRIPTI SAINI 2026.02.23 17:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-63079- memo, this Court is of the considered opi of regular bail to the petitioner at this stage. 11. Accordingly, the present petition for grant of regular bail is dismissed. 12. However, it is clarified that any observation made herein is only for the purpose of deciding the present petition and shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case at trial 13. All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed o February 23, 202 tripti Whether speaking/non Whether reportable -2025 (O&M) memo, this Court is of the considered opinion that no ground is made out for grant of regular bail to the petitioner at this stage. Accordingly, the present petition for grant of regular bail is dismissed. However, it is clarified that any observation made herein is only for of deciding the present petition and shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case at trial. All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed o , 2026 Whether speaking/non-speaking : Speaking Whether reportable : Yes/No -5- nion that no ground is made out for grant Accordingly, the present petition for grant of regular bail is dismissed. However, it is clarified that any observation made herein is only for of deciding the present petition and shall not be construed as an All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed of. (MANDEEP PANNU) JUDGE nion that no ground is made out for grant Accordingly, the present petition for grant of regular bail is dismissed. However, it is clarified that any observation made herein is only for of deciding the present petition and shall not be construed as an f. TRIPTI SAINI 2026.02.23 17:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document