IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT 214 Nand Kishore Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) [ CORAM: Present : SURYA PARTAP SINGH petitioner under Section 2023’. It No.14/2015 dated 05.05.2015, under Sections 8, 18, 29, 27A and 30 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, here to as ‘NDPS Act’ NCB Chandigarh Zonal Unit, Chandigarh, 2022 dated 01.11.2022 titled as ‘NCB V/s Nand Kishore’. 2. abovementioned case Narcotics Control Bureau CRM-M-10384-2026 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Nand Kishore VERSUS Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA PARTAP SINGH Mr. Vinod Ghai, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Arnav Ghai and Mr. Prashant Kharb Budhera, Advocates for the petitioner. Mr. Sourabh Goel, Special Public Prosecutor with Ms. Geetika Sharma, Ms. Himanshi Ms. Drishti Saraf, Advocates for the respondent. ***** SURYA PARTAP SINGH, J. This petition for bail is the petitioner under Section 483 of ‘the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita has been filed with regard to a No.14/2015 dated 05.05.2015, under Sections 8, 18, 29, 27A and 30 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, here to as ‘NDPS Act’. The abovementioned NCB Chandigarh Zonal Unit, Chandigarh, 2022 dated 01.11.2022 titled as ‘NCB V/s Nand Kishore’. Briefly stating the facts emerging from record are that the abovementioned case came into being Narcotics Control Bureau, hereinafter being referred to as ‘complainant’ (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-10384-2026 (O&M) Date of decision : 14.07.2026 ..... Petitioner VERSUS ..... Respondent SURYA PARTAP SINGH Mr. Vinod Ghai, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Arnav Ghai and Mr. Prashant Kharb Budhera, Advocates Special Public Prosecutor with Ms. Geetika Sharma, Ms. Himanshi Gautam and Ms. Drishti Saraf, Advocates for the respondent. ***** the fourth petition, filed by the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita a prosecution bearing NCB Crime No.14/2015 dated 05.05.2015, under Sections 8, 18, 29, 27A and 30 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, hereinafter being referred d prosecution has been initiated NCB Chandigarh Zonal Unit, Chandigarh, and registered as NDPS-415 2022 dated 01.11.2022 titled as ‘NCB V/s Nand Kishore’. Briefly stating the facts emerging from record are that the came into being at the instance of officials of , hereinafter being referred to as ‘complainant’ (O&M) .2026 Petitioner ..... Respondent Mr. Arnav Ghai and Mr. Prashant Kharb Budhera, Advocates filed by the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, bearing NCB Crime No.14/2015 dated 05.05.2015, under Sections 8, 18, 29, 27A and 30 of inafter being referred by 415- Briefly stating the facts emerging from record are that the at the instance of officials of , hereinafter being referred to as ‘complainant’ GAURAV THAKUR 2026.07.16 14:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document only. According to the received a secret information opium through various persons @Lakha’ and ‘Jasghir Singh’ 3. information was received on 04.05.2015 and on 05.05.2015, the officials of NCB conducted a joint operation local police and in the abovementioned raids, 36.15 kg opium lacs currency notes accused ‘Sukhbir Singh @Sukha’ and ‘Lakhbir Singh @ 4. took place, course of investigation, when accused ‘Sukhbir Singh @Sukha’ and ‘Lakhbir Singh @Lakha’ disclosure statements, wherein they nominated the present petitioner as supplier of the abovementioned contraband. 5. Custody certifica record. 6. 7. petitioner that on the basis of disclosure statement suffered CRM-M-10384-2026 (O&M) 2 According to the facts set-out by the prosecution, received a secret information with regard to opium through various persons, to ‘Sukhbir Singh @Sukha’, ‘Lakhbir Singh @Lakha’ and ‘Jasghir Singh’. It is the case of the prosecution that information was received on 04.05.2015 and on 05.05.2015, the officials of NCB conducted a joint operation with ‘Special Task Force’ (STF) Hisar and local police and in the abovementioned raids, 36.15 kg opium lacs currency notes (drug money) were recovered ‘Sukhbir Singh @Sukha’ and ‘Lakhbir Singh @ According to prosecution, once the abovementioned recovery place, investigation of the present case was taken up, and during the course of investigation, when accused ‘Sukhbir Singh @Sukha’ and ‘Lakhbir Singh @Lakha’ were interrogated, they suffered their respective disclosure statements, wherein they nominated the present petitioner as supplier of the abovementioned contraband. Status report has already be ustody certificate of the petitioner has b Heard. It has been contended by learned petitioner that the petitioner in the present case has been implicated, merely on the basis of disclosure statement suffered (O&M) 2 out by the prosecution, the officials of NCB with regard to delivery of large quantity of to ‘Sukhbir Singh @Sukha’, ‘Lakhbir Singh It is the case of the prosecution that the abovementioned information was received on 04.05.2015 and on 05.05.2015, the officials of with ‘Special Task Force’ (STF) Hisar and local police and in the abovementioned raids, 36.15 kg opium and Rs.19.4 were recovered from the possession of ‘Sukhbir Singh @Sukha’ and ‘Lakhbir Singh @Lakha’. According to prosecution, once the abovementioned recovery investigation of the present case was taken up, and during the course of investigation, when accused ‘Sukhbir Singh @Sukha’ and were interrogated, they suffered their respective disclosure statements, wherein they nominated the present petitioner as supplier of the abovementioned contraband. een filed by learned State Counsel been filed today. They be taken on It has been contended by learned Senior Counsel for the in the present case has been implicated, merely on the basis of disclosure statement suffered by his co-accused, and that the officials of NCB arge quantity of to ‘Sukhbir Singh @Sukha’, ‘Lakhbir Singh the abovementioned information was received on 04.05.2015 and on 05.05.2015, the officials of with ‘Special Task Force’ (STF) Hisar and and Rs.19.4 from the possession of According to prosecution, once the abovementioned recovery investigation of the present case was taken up, and during the course of investigation, when accused ‘Sukhbir Singh @Sukha’ and were interrogated, they suffered their respective disclosure statements, wherein they nominated the present petitioner as learned State Counsel. be taken on ounsel for the in the present case has been implicated, merely , and that GAURAV THAKUR 2026.07.16 14:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document pursuant to abovementioned disclosure statement recovered from the possession of petitioner. It has also been contended by learned Senior Counsel for bail petitioner is entitled to the benefit of bail, as from the date of dismissal of last petition for bail trial. As incarceration 8. petitioner has been petitioner has undergone. It has been contended by learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has alrea period of more than three years and eleven months to delay in trial and long period of incarceration, the right of speedy trial of the petitioner is has sought for 9. controverted the abovementioned arguments. It has been by learned Special Public Prosecutor for the NCB that present case is a case, wherein there were accused have already been concluded and two co have been convicted CRM-M-10384-2026 (O&M) 3 pursuant to abovementioned disclosure statement recovered from the possession of petitioner. It has also been contended by Senior Counsel for the petitioner that although filed by the petitioner, but th petitioner is entitled to the benefit of bail, as from the date of dismissal of last petition for bail, on 13.08.2025, there per learned Senior Counse incarceration and delay in trial renders the The thrust of arguments of learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has been upon the period of long incarceration to which the petitioner has undergone. It has been contended by learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has alrea period of more than three years and eleven months to delay in trial and long period of incarceration, the right of speedy trial of petitioner is being denied, the learned Senior Counsel has sought for the benefit of bail for the petitioner. The learned Special Public Prosecutor for the NCB controverted the abovementioned arguments. It has been by learned Special Public Prosecutor for the NCB that present case is a case, there were several accused and accused have already been concluded and two co have been convicted (whereas remaining have been acquitted (O&M) 3 pursuant to abovementioned disclosure statement, nothing incriminating was recovered from the possession of petitioner. It has also been contended by for the petitioner that although this is fourth petitio he same is maintainable and petitioner is entitled to the benefit of bail, as from the date of dismissal of there is no significant progress in el for the petitioner, prolong e petitioner to be eligible for bail arguments of learned Senior Counsel for the upon the period of long incarceration to which the petitioner has undergone. It has been contended by learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has already suffered incarceration for a period of more than three years and eleven months. While alleging that due to delay in trial and long period of incarceration, the right of speedy trial of denied, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner the benefit of bail for the petitioner. The learned Special Public Prosecutor for the NCB controverted the abovementioned arguments. It has been pointedly argued by learned Special Public Prosecutor for the NCB that present case is a case, accused and two trials with regard to other co accused have already been concluded and two co-accused of the petitioner whereas remaining have been acquitted). , nothing incriminating was recovered from the possession of petitioner. It has also been contended by this is fourth petition the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of bail, as from the date of dismissal of is no significant progress in the ged l. arguments of learned Senior Counsel for the upon the period of long incarceration to which the petitioner has undergone. It has been contended by learned Senior Counsel dy suffered incarceration for a . While alleging that due to delay in trial and long period of incarceration, the right of speedy trial of petitioner has argued by learned Special Public Prosecutor for the NCB that present case is a case, two trials with regard to other co- accused of the petitioner GAURAV THAKUR 2026.07.16 14:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 10. contended that the petitioner is a person absconded for a long period and was declared a proclaimed offender. With regard to above, it has been contended by learned Special Public Prosecutor for the NCB that the petitio 2013 and he was re Public Prosecutor for the NCB, the delay in trial in the present case was due to non-appearance of the petitioner for a long period. 11. the NCB has also contended that by the petitioner significant change in attending circ learned Special Public Prosecutor for the NCB, otherwise also in the present case, the recovery of huge quantity of contraband ambit of commercial quantity, i.e. 36.150 kg of opium, is involve without sa Act, the petitioner Special Public Prosecutor for the NCB with any o 12. 13. the relevant factors which are required to be taken into consideration for a decision:- CRM-M-10384-2026 (O&M) 4 The learned Special Public Prosecutor for the NCB has fu contended that the petitioner is a person absconded for a long period and was declared a proclaimed offender. With regard to above, it has been contended by learned Special Public Prosecutor for the NCB that the petitioner was declared proclaimed offender in the year 2013 and he was re-arrested in the year 2022. According to learned Special Public Prosecutor for the NCB, the delay in trial in the present case was due appearance of the petitioner for a long period. In addition to above, the learned Special Public Prosecutor for the NCB has also contended that otherwise also, this is fourth petition by the petitioner and from the date of dismissal of significant change in attending circumstances has taken place. According to learned Special Public Prosecutor for the NCB, otherwise also in the present case, the recovery of huge quantity of contraband ambit of commercial quantity, i.e. 36.150 kg of opium, is involve atisfying the twin conditions, enshrined under Section , the petitioner cannot be accorded the benefit of bail. Special Public Prosecutor for the NCB, t of the twin conditions. The record has been perused carefully. A perusal of record shows that in the present the relevant factors which are required to be taken into consideration for a - (O&M) 4 The learned Special Public Prosecutor for the NCB has further contended that the petitioner is a person, who has dubious record, as he absconded for a long period and was declared a proclaimed offender. With regard to above, it has been contended by learned Special Public Prosecutor ner was declared proclaimed offender in the year arrested in the year 2022. According to learned Special Public Prosecutor for the NCB, the delay in trial in the present case was due appearance of the petitioner for a long period. In addition to above, the learned Special Public Prosecutor for otherwise also, this is fourth petition filed and from the date of dismissal of third petition, no umstances has taken place. According to learned Special Public Prosecutor for the NCB, otherwise also in the present case, the recovery of huge quantity of contraband, which comes within the ambit of commercial quantity, i.e. 36.150 kg of opium, is involved, and that enshrined under Section-37 of NDPS not be accorded the benefit of bail. As per learn the petitioner has failed to com The record has been perused carefully. A perusal of record shows that in the present case, following are the relevant factors which are required to be taken into consideration for a rther , who has dubious record, as he absconded for a long period and was declared a proclaimed offender. With regard to above, it has been contended by learned Special Public Prosecutor ner was declared proclaimed offender in the year arrested in the year 2022. According to learned Special Public Prosecutor for the NCB, the delay in trial in the present case was due In addition to above, the learned Special Public Prosecutor for filed third petition, no umstances has taken place. According to learned Special Public Prosecutor for the NCB, otherwise also in the present , which comes within the d, and that 37 of NDPS ned mply case, following are the relevant factors which are required to be taken into consideration for a GAURAV THAKUR 2026.07.16 14:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 14. abovementioned factors the case, for bail, filed by the petitioner, is Hence, the same is hereby 15. shall not have any 16. disposed of, accordingly. 14.07.202 Gaurav Thakur CRM-M-10384-2026 (O&M) 5 i. that the past of the petitioner in itself speaks in volumes about his conduct, as he absconded for a period of approximately nine years and was declared offender; ii. that in the present case, the recovery of contraband comes within the ambit therefore, without prescribed under Secti can’t claim the benefit to show that the petitio iii. that from the date of dismissal of third petition on 13.08.2025, no such change in has taken place, which eligible for bail. Taking into consideration the cumulative effect of all the abovementioned factors, but without commenting anything on the merits of , it is hereby held that the present petition, which is fourth petition filed by the petitioner, is devoid of merit Hence, the same is hereby dismissed, accordingly. However, it is clarified that the abovementioned observations shall not have any bearing upon the merits of the case. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of, accordingly. 2026 Gaurav Thakur Whether speaking / reasoned Whether Reportable (O&M) 5 the past of the petitioner in itself speaks in volumes , as he absconded for a period of approximately nine years and was declared a proclaimed that in the present case, the recovery of contraband comes within the ambit of ‘commercial quantity’, and satisfying the twin conditio ion-37 of NDPS Act, the petitioner t of bail. There is nothing on rec oner satisfies the twin conditions that from the date of dismissal of third petition on change in attending circumstances h could have rendered the petitio Taking into consideration the cumulative effect of all the without commenting anything on the merits of the present petition, which is fourth petition devoid of merit and deserves dismissal. , accordingly. it is clarified that the abovementioned observations bearing upon the merits of the case. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand(s) (SURYA PARTAP SINGH) JUDGE Whether speaking / reasoned Yes/No Yes/No the past of the petitioner in itself speaks in volumes , as he absconded for a period of proclaimed that in the present case, the recovery of contraband and ons petitioner cord conditions; that from the date of dismissal of third petition on circumstances oner Taking into consideration the cumulative effect of all the without commenting anything on the merits of the present petition, which is fourth petition dismissal. it is clarified that the abovementioned observations Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand(s) ) GAURAV THAKUR 2026.07.16 14:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document