CRM-M-23600- IN THE H (242) AVTAR SINGH STATE OF PUNJ CORAM: HON Present: Mr. Mr. V *** MANISHA BATR 1. The under Section 48 “BNSS”) for gran 22.04.2024 registe Psychotropic Sub District STF Win withdrawn on 27.0 2. Brief petition are that petitioner along w conducting their p from the present p -2026 (O&M) 1 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB A CHANDIGARH NGH Versus PUNJAB HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANIS Sandeep Arora, Advocate for the Mr. Vivek Sharma, AAG, Punjab *** BATRA, J. (ORAL) The instant one is the second petitio 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Surak r grant of regular bail in case aris registered under Sections 21 and 29 c Substances Act (for short “NDPS F Wing, SAS Nagar. The previou 27.08.2025. Brief facts of the case relevant for that on 22.04.2024, on the basis ong with co-accused Sachin was appr their personal search, recovery of 540 esent petitioner and 480 grams of her JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH CRM-M-23600-2026 (O&M) Date of decision : 04.05.2026 ... Petitioner ...Respondent ANISHA BATRA for the petitioner petition preferred by the petitioner Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short e arising out of FIR No.68 dated and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and NDPS Act) at Police Station STF, revious petition was dismissed as for the disposal of the present is of a secret information, the s apprehended by a police party. On of 540 grams of heroin was effected of heroin was effected from the co- 2026 oner dent ioner short ated and STF, d as esent , the . On ected - AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.04 19:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-23600- accused. Since the their possession th spot. After comple was presented in accused is facing t 3. It is a falsely implicated involvement in an He is in custody s challan has been fi witness has been detention entitles keeping him in cu fresh ground to s extended benefit o benefit. It is, ther petitioner deserv 4. Notic 5. Learn argue the matter. that keeping in vie as well as the fact him, he is not enti -2026 (O&M) 2 nce they could not produce any valid sion the recovered contraband, they completion of necessary investigation ted in the Court and presently, the acing trial for commission of aforemen It is argued by learned counsel for licated in this case. A false recove t in another case cannot be a ground t tody since 22.04.2024. Investigation been filed. Conclusion of trial is likely been examined so far out of total ntitles him to seek bail. No useful in custody anymore. Each day spent d to seek concession of bail. The nefit of bail. On parity, he too dese , therefore, urged that the petition d serves to be granted benefit of regular Notice of motion. Learned State counsel accepts notice atter. He has placed on record custo in view the gravity of the allegations he fact that commercial quantity of co ot entitled to get benefit of bail as rigo y valid license or permit to keep in they were formally arrested at the gation and usual formalities, challan , the petitioner along with the co- rementioned offences. l for the petitioner that he has been covery was planted upon him. His ound to deny benefit of bail to him. ation has since been completed and ely to take time as no prosecution total 17 witnesses. His prolonged seful purpose would be served by spent by him in custody grants him The co-accused has already been o deserves to be extended the same ition deserves to be allowed and the egular bail. notice of the petition and is ready to d custody certificate and has argued ations levelled against the petitioner y of contraband was recovered from as rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS ep in t the allan - been . His . and ution nged d by him been same d the dy to gued ioner from DPS AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.04 19:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-23600- Act would be attr committing simila that the petition is 6. Learn placed on record gravity of the al commercial quanti get benefit of bail against him. Mor maintainable. The offences again, if liable to be dismis 7. This C for the parties at co 8. As p possession of co 22.04.2024. The commission of the maintainability of mentioned that, an grant of bail and it bail application, to view different from -2026 (O&M) 3 attracted against him. The petition similar offences again, if extended ben tion is liable to be dismissed. Learned State counsel has advance ecord custody certificate and has arg the allegations levelled against the quantity of contraband was recovered of bail as rigors of Section 37 of the . Moreso, the instant petition, being e. The petitioner may abscond or in ain, if extended benefit of bail. Hence dismissed. This Court has heard the rival submis es at considerable length. As per the allegations, the petitio commercial quantity of the af The allegations against him prima of the subject offences by the petitio lity of this petition being successive hat, an accused has a right to move s l and it is the duty of the Court, while tion, to consider that any fresh groun nt from the one taken in the earlier app etitioner may abscond or involve in ed benefit of bail. Hence, it is urged ance notice of the petition. He has argued that keeping in view the st the petitioner and the fact that vered from him, he is not entitled to f the NDPS Act would be attracted being a successive petition, is not or involve in committing similar ence, it is urged that the petition is ubmissions made by learned counsel petitioner was found in conscious he aforementioned contraband on prima facie make out a case for petitioner. So far as the question of ve one is concerned, it may be ove successive bail application for while entertaining such a subsequent ground which persuade it to take a lier application is made out or not. It ve in rged has the that ed to acted not milar on is unsel cious on for n of y be n for uent ke a t. It AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.04 19:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-23600- is also required t provides a new c circumstances. He application can be comes with a cond the trial. No rec antecedents. He is time to conclude. account of delay i the light of Sectio upon the observa Hussain v. State held that grant of fettered under Sec A of Cr.P.C. whic that jails are overc appalling. The da likely to be harde Manmandal and (Criminal) No.865 of Odisha, 2023 L extended benefit o period by observ precious fundamen -2026 (O&M) 4 ired to be noted that every day spe new cause of action for filing a b He cannot be kept in custody for can be considered even if it is filed r a condition that the prosecution must o recovery has been effected from . He is in custody since 22.04.2024. T clude. It is well settled proposition elay in trial and long period of incarc Section 37 of the NDPS Act. Relianc bservations made by Hon’ble Apex tate (NCT of Delhi), 2023 SCC On ant of bail on account of undue delay er Section 37 of the NDPS Act, given . which is applicable to offence under e overcrowded and their living condit he danger of unjustified imprisonm hardened rather than reformed. Relia and Another v. State of West Be o.8656 of 2023 decided on 14.09.20 023 LiveLaw (SC) 533, wherein the nefit of bail to the accused who had bserving that prolonged incarceratio damental right guaranteed under Arti ay spent by an accused in custody g a bail application under certain dy for indefinite period and the bail filed repeatedly. The denial of bail n must press for early completion of from the petitioner. He has clean 024. The trial will take considerable sition of law that grant of bail on incarceration is to be considered in eliance in this regard can be placed pex Court in Mohd. Muslim @ OnLine SC 352, wherein it was e delay in trial cannot be said to be given the imperative of Section 436- under the Act. It was also observed conditions are, more often than not, isonment is that inmates are more . Reliance can also be placed upon t Bengal, Special Leave Petition 9.2023 and Rabi Prakash v. State ein the Hon’ble Supreme Court had o had been incarcerated for a long ceration militated against the most er Article 21 of the Constitution and tody rtain bail bail n of clean rable il on ed in laced @ was to be - rved not, more upon ion ate t had long most and AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.04 19:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-23600- in such a situatio embargo containe 9. Relia Chhattishgarh & pronounced verdic 37 of NDPS Act w as it comes with completion of tria held that appella commercial quant incarceration for a 10. Simil v. Central Bureau and inordinate del considered the cor including Section 436A (which requ not concluded wit would apply.
11. In th Crminal Appeal quantity of narcoti -2026 (O&M) 5 ituation, the constitutional principles ntained under Section 37 of the NDPS Reliance can also be placed upon h & Anr., Criminal Appeal No.48 verdict of Hon’ble Supreme Court ob Act will not be a bar for considering with a condition that the prosecuti of trial. In the above-mentioned case ppellant who was being prosecuted quantity of narcotic substance, was e n for a period of 19 months.
Similarly in another case i.e. in the c reau of Investigation, (2022) 10 SC te delay engaged the attention of the H he correct approach towards bail, with ection 37 NDPS Act. The court expre h requires inter alia the accused to be ed within specified periods) of the Cr In the case of Ismail Khan @ Pa al No.4911 of 2025 with regard narcotic substance, the Hon’ble Supre nciples must override the statutory NDPS Act. upon Santosh Pawar Vs. State of o.4883/2025, which is a recently ourt observing that rigors of Section ering the case of an accused for bail osecution would press for an early d case, the Hon’ble Supreme Court ecuted for being in possession of was entitled for bail in view of her n the case of Satender Kumar Antil 0 SCC 51 prolonged incarceration f the Hon’ble Supreme Court, which l, with respect to several enactments, t expressed the opinion that Section to be enlarged on bail if the trial is the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Pathan vs. State of Rajasthan regard to recovery of commercial Supreme Court accorded the benefit utory of ently ction r bail early ourt n of f her ntil ation hich ents, ction ial is 1973 an rcial nefit AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.04 19:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-23600- of bail to the accus and 08 months of t 12. Simil No.15699-2025 tit and in the case of of 2025.
13. On an case in the light o petitioner has suff days. The trial is n prosecution witne the petitioner is n record to show tha trial or will abscon 14. In vie case is made out f petition is allowed his furnishing pers trial Court/Chief J 15. It is, be construed as an and shall not influ -2026 (O&M) 6 e accused in view of prolonged incarce ths of the accused.
imilar benefit has been extended 25 titled as Ebrahim @ Ibrahim SK ase of Pamesh Arora vs. UT Chandig On analyzing the peculiar facts and light of the aforementioned principle as suffered prolonged incarceration fo rial is not likely to be concluded in nea witnesses have been examined so fa er is not likely to serve any fruitful ow that if released on bail, the petitio abscond. The co-accused has already b In view of the above discussion, this e out for grant of bail to the petitioner llowed and the petitioner is ordered to g personal as well as surety bonds to hief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistr It is, however, clarified that the obse d as an expression of opinion of this C t influence the outcome of the trial in a incarceration for a period of 02 years ended in another appeal i.e. SLP SK vs. The State of West Bengal ndigarh Criminal Appeal No.4872 nd circumstances of the present nciples of law, it transpires that the tion for a period of 02 years and 07 in near future as only none out of 17 so far. The continued detention of uitful purpose. There is nothing on petitioner will not participate in the ready been extended benefit of bail. n, this Court is of the opinion that a itioner at this stage. Accordingly, the ered to be released on bail subject to nds to the satisfaction of the learned agistrate concerned. e observations made above shall not this Court on the merits of the case ial in any manner. years LP gal 72 esent t the d 07 of 17 n of g on n the hat a , the ct to rned l not case AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.04 19:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-23600- 16. Since any, is rendered in 04.05.2026 Amit Sharma -2026 (O&M) 7 Since the main petition has been all ered infructuous. (MA Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes Whether reportable:- Yes/No allowed, pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE Yes/No n, if AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.04 19:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.