IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 226 ANTER SINGH @ ANTAR SINGH STATE OF 239 NACHATAR SINGH @ SATRI STATE OF CORAM: Present: RAJESH BHARDWAJ 1. out of a common FIR. 2. praying for granting regular bail in case FIR No. Sections 22(C Nehianwala, District Bathinda 3. patrolling when reached near IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ANTER SINGH @ ANTAR SINGH Versus STATE OF PUNJAB NACHATAR SINGH @ SATRI Versus STATE OF PUNJAB CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ Mr. Laghuinder Singh Sekhon, Advocate, Mr. P.S. Sekhon, Advocate for the petitioner in CRM-M-63392-2024. Mr. Abhishek Singh, Advocate for the petitioner in CRM-M-63392-2024. Ms. Simran Goria, AAG, Punjab. ***** RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral) This order will dispose of above mentioned petitions as both arise out of a common FIR. Petitioners have approached this Court by way of present petition praying for granting regular bail in case FIR No. 22(C) and 29 of NDPS Act, 1905 Nehianwala, District Bathinda. Succinctly, facts of the case are that patrolling when reached near Goniana Mandi from IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 28.07.2025 CRM-M-63392-2024 ...Petitioner Versus ...Respondent CRM-M-23908-2025 ...Petitioner Versus ...Respondent RAJESH BHARDWAJ Mr. Laghuinder Singh Sekhon, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. Abhishek Singh, Advocate for the petitioner Ms. Simran Goria, AAG, Punjab. This order will dispose of above mentioned petitions as both arise approached this Court by way of present petition praying for granting regular bail in case FIR No.36 dated 24.03.2024 under of NDPS Act, 1905 registered at Police Station facts of the case are that the police party while on Mandi from Delhi Public School at about 28.07.2025 2024 ...Petitioner ...Respondent ...Petitioner ...Respondent This order will dispose of above mentioned petitions as both arise approached this Court by way of present petitions under registered at Police Station the police party while on at about MOHIT 2025.07.29 07:00 CRM-M- CRM-M- 5.00 PM, they saw a suspicion they stopped their vehicle. On opening the door of the car they two persons transparent polythene contraband and thus disclosed their names as Anter Singh @ Antar Singh (petitioner in CRM 63392-2024) and Nachatar Singh @ Satri (petitioner in CRM The search was conducted and the tablets which into possession and on counting the same, tablets, of Tramadol Hydrocholoride Tablets registration of commenced, challan learned Judge Special Court, Bathinda for grant of regular bail, however, after hearing both the sides, the learned Court declined t 05.11.2024 and 08.07.2024 respectively. this Court for the grant of regular bail by way of filing the present petitions. Aggrieved by the same the petitioners have approached this Court prayin grant of bail by way of filing the present petitions. 4. petitioners have been falsely and frivolously implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the story made by the prosecutio and the case has been planted on the petitioners. They submit that the recovery in the present case has been effected from a public place, however, no independent witness has been joined and thus there is a blatant violat NDPS Act. They further submit that the They further submits that there is no progress in the trial, despite are languishing -63392-2024 -23908-2025 , they saw a white Swift Dzire car suspicion they stopped their vehicle. On opening the door of the car they two persons sitting on the back seat, counting transparent polythene bag. They were suspected to contraband and thus they were given offer to be searched. On asking they disclosed their names as Anter Singh @ Antar Singh (petitioner in CRM 2024) and Nachatar Singh @ Satri (petitioner in CRM he search was conducted and the tablets which into possession and on counting the same, of Tramadol Hydrocholoride Tablets registration of the FIR, both were arrested on the spot. The investigation commenced, challan was presented. Both the petitioners approached before the learned Judge Special Court, Bathinda for grant of regular bail, however, after hearing both the sides, the learned Court declined t 05.11.2024 and 08.07.2024 respectively. Hence, the petitioners have approached this Court for the grant of regular bail by way of filing the present petitions. Aggrieved by the same the petitioners have approached this Court prayin grant of bail by way of filing the present petitions. Learned counsel for the petitioners have submitted that the petitioners have been falsely and frivolously implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the story made by the prosecutio and the case has been planted on the petitioners. They submit that the recovery in the present case has been effected from a public place, however, no independent has been joined and thus there is a blatant violat t. They further submit that the petitioners have no criminal antecedents. They further submits that there is no progress in the trial, despite are languishing in jail from the last more than one year. Thus, t -2- Swift Dzire car was parked on the slip road. On suspicion they stopped their vehicle. On opening the door of the car they found counting strips lying on the back seat in spected to be in possession of some they were given offer to be searched. On asking they disclosed their names as Anter Singh @ Antar Singh (petitioner in CRM- 2024) and Nachatar Singh @ Satri (petitioner in CRM-M-23908-2025). he search was conducted and the tablets which were lying visible, were taken 250 strips, each strip containing 10 of Tramadol Hydrocholoride Tablets were recovered. Thus on the h were arrested on the spot. The investigation Both the petitioners approached before the learned Judge Special Court, Bathinda for grant of regular bail, however, after hearing both the sides, the learned Court declined the same vide order dated Hence, the petitioners have approached this Court for the grant of regular bail by way of filing the present petitions. Aggrieved by the same the petitioners have approached this Court praying for grant of bail by way of filing the present petitions. Learned counsel for the petitioners have submitted that the petitioners have been falsely and frivolously implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the story made by the prosecution is totally a cock and bull story and the case has been planted on the petitioners. They submit that the recovery in the present case has been effected from a public place, however, no independent has been joined and thus there is a blatant violation of Section 50 of the petitioners have no criminal antecedents. They further submits that there is no progress in the trial, despite the petitioners in jail from the last more than one year. Thus, they have submitted on the slip road. On found strips lying on the back seat in a of some they were given offer to be searched. On asking they -M- 2025). taken strip containing 10 Thus on the h were arrested on the spot. The investigation Both the petitioners approached before the learned Judge Special Court, Bathinda for grant of regular bail, however, after ame vide order dated Hence, the petitioners have approached this Court for the grant of regular bail by way of filing the present petitions. g for Learned counsel for the petitioners have submitted that the petitioners have been falsely and frivolously implicated in the present case. It is n is totally a cock and bull story and the case has been planted on the petitioners. They submit that the recovery in the present case has been effected from a public place, however, no independent ion of Section 50 of the petitioners have no criminal antecedents. the petitioners hey have submitted MOHIT 2025.07.29 07:00 CRM-M- CRM-M- that in the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioners deserve to be granted bail. 5. by counsel for the petitioners. She submits that as per the FSL report, the contraband that is Tramadol Hydrocholoride, which was recovered from the petitioners was found to be 482.500 commercial quantity and thus, pr attracted. She further submits that out of 30 prosecution witnesses, only one witness has been examined. She has placed on record the custody certificates of the petitioners. 6. petitioners were arrested on 24.03.2024. The recovery effected from the petitioners as per FSL report is 482.500 one witness has been examined out of 30 witnesses and the custod would reflect that petitioners have suffered incarceration of 01 year 03 months and 28 days. 7. Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), 2023 LiveLaw(SC)260 the case of the petitioner is covered by the ratio of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In the abovesaid case, Hon'ble Supreme Court expressed its views as under:- -63392-2024 -23908-2025 that in the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioners deserve to be granted bail. Learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the submission made by counsel for the petitioners. She submits that as per the FSL report, the contraband that is Tramadol Hydrocholoride, which was recovered from the petitioners was found to be 482.500 gm, which commercial quantity and thus, provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are attracted. She further submits that out of 30 prosecution witnesses, only one witness has been examined. She has placed on record the custody certificates of the petitioners. After hearing learned counsel for petitioners were arrested on 24.03.2024. The recovery effected from the petitioners as per FSL report is 482.500 gm one witness has been examined out of 30 witnesses and the custod would reflect that petitioners have suffered incarceration of 01 year 03 months and As held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), 2023 LiveLaw(SC)260 the case of the petitioner is covered by the ratio of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In the abovesaid case, Hon'ble Supreme Court expressed its views 19. A plain and literal interpretation of the conditions under Section 37 (i.e., that Court should be satisfied that the accused is not guilty and would not commit any offence) would effectively exclude grant of bail altogether, resulting in punitive detention and unsanctioned preventive detention as well. Therefore, the only manner in which such special conditions as enacted under Section 37 can be considered within constitutional parameters is where the court is reasonably satisfied on a prima facie look at the -3- that in the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioners deserve to be Learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the submission made by counsel for the petitioners. She submits that as per the FSL report, the contraband that is Tramadol Hydrocholoride, which was recovered from the , which falls within the category of ovisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are attracted. She further submits that out of 30 prosecution witnesses, only one witness has been examined. She has placed on record the custody certificates of After hearing learned counsel for the parties, it is deciphered that the petitioners were arrested on 24.03.2024. The recovery effected from the gm of Tramadol Hydrochloride and only one witness has been examined out of 30 witnesses and the custody certificate would reflect that petitioners have suffered incarceration of 01 year 03 months and As held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mohd Muslim @ Hussain Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), 2023 LiveLaw(SC)260, this Court is of the opinion that the case of the petitioner is covered by the ratio of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In the abovesaid case, Hon'ble Supreme Court expressed its views 19. A plain and literal interpretation of the conditions under that Court should be satisfied that the accused is not guilty and would not commit any offence) would effectively exclude grant of bail altogether, resulting in punitive detention and unsanctioned preventive detention as well. Therefore, the only which such special conditions as enacted under Section 37 can be considered within constitutional parameters is where the court is reasonably satisfied on a prima facie look at the that in the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioners deserve to be Learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the submission made by counsel for the petitioners. She submits that as per the FSL report, the contraband that is Tramadol Hydrocholoride, which was recovered from the within the category of ovisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are attracted. She further submits that out of 30 prosecution witnesses, only one witness has been examined. She has placed on record the custody certificates of the parties, it is deciphered that the petitioners were arrested on 24.03.2024. The recovery effected from the of Tramadol Hydrochloride and only y certificate would reflect that petitioners have suffered incarceration of 01 year 03 months and Mohd Muslim @ Hussain , this Court is of the opinion that the case of the petitioner is covered by the ratio of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In the abovesaid case, Hon'ble Supreme Court expressed its views 19. A plain and literal interpretation of the conditions under that Court should be satisfied that the accused is not guilty and would not commit any offence) would effectively exclude grant of bail altogether, resulting in punitive detention and unsanctioned preventive detention as well. Therefore, the only which such special conditions as enacted under Section 37 can be considered within constitutional parameters is where the court is reasonably satisfied on a prima facie look at the MOHIT 2025.07.29 07:00 CRM-M- CRM-M- 8. conclusion parties before the trial Court. This Court would refrain itself from commenting anything on the merits of the case. The trial of the case will take sufficient long time. Thus, keeping the opinion that learned counsel for the petitioner for grant of regular bail to the petitioner 9. released on bail on concerned trial Court/Duty Magistrate. -63392-2024 -23908-2025 material on record (whenever the bail application is made) that the accused is not guilty. Any other interpretation, would result in complete denial of the bail to a person accused of offences such as those enacted under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. 20 xxxxx 21 .....it would be important to reflect that laws which impose stringent conditions for grant of bail, may be necessary in public interest; yet, if trials are not concluded in time, the injustice wrecked on the individual is immeasurable. 22 xxxxx 23. There is a further danger of the prisoner turning to crime, “as crime not only turns admirable, but the more professional the crime, more honour is paid to the criminal”22 (also see Donald Clemmer’s ‘The Prison Community’ published in 194023). Incarceration has further deleterious effects belongs to the weakest economic strata: immediate loss of livelihood, and in several cases, scattering of families as well as loss of family bonds and alienation from society. The courts therefore, have to be sensitive to these aspects (because in the event of an acquittal, the loss to the accused is irreparable), and ensure that trials–especially in cases, where special laws enact stringent provisions, are taken up and concluded speedily.' The veracity of the allegations would be assessed only after the conclusion of the trial and on the appreciation of evidence to be led by both the parties before the trial Court. This Court would refrain itself from commenting anything on the merits of the case. The trial of the case will take sufficient long time. Thus, keeping in view the arguments raised by both the sides, this Court is of the opinion that learned counsel for the petitioner for grant of regular bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the present petition released on bail on their furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court/Duty Magistrate. -4- material on record (whenever the bail application is made) that d is not guilty. Any other interpretation, would result in complete denial of the bail to a person accused of offences such as those enacted under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. 21 .....it would be important to reflect that laws which impose stringent conditions for grant of bail, may be necessary in public interest; yet, if trials are not concluded in time, the injustice wrecked on the individual is immeasurable. 23. There is a further danger of the prisoner turning to crime, “as me not only turns admirable, but the more professional the crime, more honour is paid to the criminal”22 (also see Donald Clemmer’s ‘The Prison Community’ published in 194023). Incarceration has further deleterious effects–where the accused weakest economic strata: immediate loss of livelihood, and in several cases, scattering of families as well as loss of family bonds and alienation from society. The courts therefore, have to be sensitive to these aspects (because in the al, the loss to the accused is irreparable), and especially in cases, where special laws enact stringent provisions, are taken up and concluded speedily.' The veracity of the allegations would be assessed only after the of the trial and on the appreciation of evidence to be led by both the parties before the trial Court. This Court would refrain itself from commenting anything on the merits of the case. The trial of the case will take sufficient long in view the arguments raised by both the sides, this Court is of the opinion that learned counsel for the petitioners succeed in making out a case Accordingly, the present petitions are allowed and are ordered to be furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the material on record (whenever the bail application is made) that d is not guilty. Any other interpretation, would result in complete denial of the bail to a person accused of offences such as 21 .....it would be important to reflect that laws which impose stringent conditions for grant of bail, may be necessary in public interest; yet, if trials are not concluded in time, the injustice 23. There is a further danger of the prisoner turning to crime, “as me not only turns admirable, but the more professional the crime, more honour is paid to the criminal”22 (also see Donald Clemmer’s ‘The Prison Community’ published in 194023). where the accused weakest economic strata: immediate loss of livelihood, and in several cases, scattering of families as well as loss of family bonds and alienation from society. The courts therefore, have to be sensitive to these aspects (because in the al, the loss to the accused is irreparable), and especially in cases, where special laws enact The veracity of the allegations would be assessed only after the of the trial and on the appreciation of evidence to be led by both the parties before the trial Court. This Court would refrain itself from commenting anything on the merits of the case. The trial of the case will take sufficient long in view the arguments raised by both the sides, this Court is of in making out a case ered to be furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the MOHIT 2025.07.29 07:00 CRM-M- CRM-M- 10. It is being clarified th bail/surety bonds within a period of one week from t be counted in the present case after one week. 11. on the merits of the case. July 28, 2025 Mohit Bishnoi Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable -63392-2024 -23908-2025 It is being clarified that in case the petitioner does not furnish bail/surety bonds within a period of one week from t be counted in the present case after one week. Nothing said herein shall be treated as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. July 28, 2025 speaking/reasoned Whether reportable -5- at in case the petitioner does not furnish bail/surety bonds within a period of one week from today, his custody will be counted in the present case after one week. Nothing said herein shall be treated as an expression of opinion (RAJESH BHARDWAJ) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No at in case the petitioner does not furnish oday, his custody will Nothing said herein shall be treated as an expression of opinion MOHIT 2025.07.29 07:00