CRM-M-32879 218 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA JASS STATE OF HARYANA CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Present:- SANJAY VASHISTH 1. 483 of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C.), for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, during the pendency of trial, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder: Name of Petitioner(s) JASS 32879-2025 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM- Date of Decision: Versus STATE OF HARYANA CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH Mr. Kuldeep Singh Siwach, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Pawan Kumar Jhanda, Sr. DAG, Haryana. SANJAY VASHISTH, J.(Oral) The instant second petition has been filed 483 of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C.), for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, during the pendency of trial, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder:- oner(s) FIR No. Date Section(s) 64 17.02.201 8 21-B, 27-A (Act No.61) of NDPS IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -M-32879-2025 Date of Decision: 11.11.2025 …Petitioner …Respondent SANJAY VASHISTH Advocate Pawan Kumar Jhanda, Sr. DAG, Haryana. petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C.), for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, during the pendency of trial, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as Section(s) Police Station District A of Sadar Fatehabad Fatehabad HIMANSHU 2025.11.13 10:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-32879 2. the present case was registered against the petitioner grams of Heroine. From the possession of other co Sukhwinder Singh @ Bitu, Shankar and Rakesh and 30 grams of Heroine respectively was also recovered. 31.03.2018 by the Court of Sessions. However, on account of absenting from the proceedings, the said concession of bail was cancelled on 03.09.2019. After again arrested on 28.08.2024 and since then petitioner is inside jail. During the period he was absconding, two more case NDPS Act were registered against the petitioner. at the recovery of 30 grams of Heroin and petitioner having suffered total incarceration months and 25 days likely to take considerable time as out of total 21 prosecution witnesses, only two bail. 3. counsel for the petitioner, learned State counse certificate dated 10.11.2025 in Court today, which is taken on record. Office to tag the same at appropriate place. A copy thereof has been handed over to the counsel for the petitioner. 32879-2025 -2- Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that FIR in the present case was registered against the petitioner Heroine. From the possession of other co Sukhwinder Singh @ Bitu, Shankar and Rakesh and 30 grams of Heroine respectively was also recovered. Initially, petitioner was released on bail vide order dated 31.03.2018 by the Court of Sessions. However, on account of absenting from the proceedings, the said concession of bail was on 03.09.2019. After a period of 05 years again arrested on 28.08.2024 and since then petitioner is inside jail. During the period he was absconding, two more case NDPS Act were registered against the petitioner. However, the star argument of the counsel is that looking at the recovery of 30 grams of Heroin and petitioner having suffered total incarceration period of custody in jail for about 01 year, 03 months and 25 days, deserves the concession of bail likely to take considerable time as out of total 21 prosecution only two have been examined till date In response to the arguments addressed by learned counsel for the petitioner, learned State counse certificate dated 10.11.2025 in Court today, which is taken on record. Office to tag the same at appropriate place. A copy thereof has been handed over to the counsel for the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that FIR in the present case was registered against the petitioner for possessing 30 Heroine. From the possession of other co-accused namely, Sukhwinder Singh @ Bitu, Shankar and Rakesh, 25 grams, 20 grams and 30 grams of Heroine respectively was also recovered. petitioner was released on bail vide order dated 31.03.2018 by the Court of Sessions. However, on account of absenting from the proceedings, the said concession of bail was period of 05 years, petitioner was again arrested on 28.08.2024 and since then petitioner is inside jail. During the period he was absconding, two more cases under the NDPS Act were registered against the petitioner. However, the star argument of the counsel is that looking at the recovery of 30 grams of Heroin and petitioner having suffered jail for about 01 year, 03 deserves the concession of bail. Moreover trial is likely to take considerable time as out of total 21 prosecution have been examined till date. Therefore prays for n response to the arguments addressed by learned counsel for the petitioner, learned State counsel, produces the custody certificate dated 10.11.2025 in Court today, which is taken on record. Office to tag the same at appropriate place. A copy thereof has been HIMANSHU 2025.11.13 10:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-32879 petitioner has already undergone months and 25 days inside jail. 4. petitioner is once again given chance to rehabilitate himself to establish in the no society. Therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to grant the concession of bail to the petitioner in the present case. allowed. Petitioner is furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/ Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Illaqa Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case. 5. any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witness in any manner directly or indirectly. 6. shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the facts case. Therefore, trial Court is expected to decide the case by taking an independent view, on the basis of evidence available on record, as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law. 7. directly found indulged in similar kind of activities, this order shall be deemed to be cancelled. 32879-2025 -3- As per the custody certificate, in the pre petitioner has already undergone custody period of about 01 year months and 25 days inside jail. In view of the circumstances, having noticed hereabove, petitioner is once again given chance to rehabilitate himself to in the normal course of life with the other persons in the Therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to grant the concession of bail to the petitioner in the present case. Consequently, prayer made in the present petition is etitioner is ordered to be released on bail, subject to his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/ Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Illaqa Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case. Needless to observe that the petitioner shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witness in any manner directly or indirectly. Any of the discussion done and recorded here above, shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the facts case. Therefore, trial Court is expected to decide the case by taking an independent view, on the basis of evidence available on record, as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law. It is further made clear that if, in future, petitione directly found indulged in similar kind of activities, this order shall be deemed to be cancelled. As per the custody certificate, in the present case, custody period of about 01 year 03 In view of the circumstances, having noticed hereabove, petitioner is once again given chance to rehabilitate himself to rmal course of life with the other persons in the Therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to grant the concession of bail to the petitioner in the present case. prayer made in the present petition is ordered to be released on bail, subject to his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/ Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Illaqa Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate that the petitioner shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witness in any Any of the discussion done and recorded here above, shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the facts of the case. Therefore, trial Court is expected to decide the case by taking an independent view, on the basis of evidence available on record, as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law. It is further made clear that if, in future, petitioner is directly found indulged in similar kind of activities, this order shall be HIMANSHU 2025.11.13 10:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-32879 8. 11.11.2025 himanshu 32879-2025 -4- Petition stands disposed of. Whether reasoned/speaking: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No Petition stands disposed of. (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE HIMANSHU 2025.11.13 10:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document