IN THE 222 Rahul Kumar State of Punjab CORAM : HON'BLE Present :- Mr. Mr. VINOD S. BHARDWAJ The Bharatiya Nagarik petitioner in case Section 22 (Section Psychotropic Substances Hoshiarpur. 2. Briefly 23.07.2023, L/SI officials, was proceeding patrol, the police direction carrying police, the said immediately apprehended Kumar. A search possession, 22 intoxicant recovered. The accused THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-63708 Date of decision: VERSUS HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD Mr. Jasinder Singh Sekhon, Advocate, Mr. Mohit Kapoor, Sr.DAG, Punjab ***** BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral) The instant third petition has been filed Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for case bearing FIR No.124 dated 23.07.2023 (Section 29 added later on) of Substances Act, 1985 at Police Station Briefly stated, the facts of the L/SI Ramandeep Kaur, along with proceeding towards Mohalla Rainka, police party noticed one person approaching carrying a polythene envelope in his person attempted to turn back. apprehended and upon inquiry, disclosed search was conducted and from intoxicant injections of Buprenorphine accused was thereafter taken into PUNJAB & HARYANA CHANDIGARH 63708-2025(O&M) decision: 04.12.2025 …Petitioner ...Respondent VINOD S. BHARDWAJ Advocate, for the petitioner. Punjab. filed under Section 483 of the grant of regular bail to the 23.07.2023 registered under of the Narcotic Drugs and Station Garhshankar, District present case are that on with other accompanying police Rainka, Garhshankar. During approaching from the opposite right hand. Upon seeing the Arousing suspicion, he was disclosed his name as Rahul the polythene bag in his Buprenorphine IP 0.3 mg/2 ml were into custody. SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2025.12.05 17:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 222 CRM 3. Counsel petitioner has been custody since 23.07.2023, 2 years and 4 involved in any Substances Act, 2 witnesses have pace. Counsel further particularly with is contended that apprehended while taken into custody which is corroborated annexed with the 4. Learned witnesses have Hence, only 06 this is the third quantity weighs commercial category. already undergone the present case the Narcotic Drugs 5. Responding that even though by this court on CRM-M-63708-2025(O&M) Counsel appearing on behalf of the been falsely implicated in the present 23.07.2023, having undergone an months. It is further submitted any other case under the Narcotic Act, 1985. Out of the 10 witnesses cited have been examined so far, and the further argues that the prosecution with respect to the mode and manner that contrary to the prosecution’s while attempting to flee upon seeing custody from his residence on 23.07.2023 corroborated by CCTV footage, photographs the present petition. Learned State Counsel on the other already been examined, 02 witnesses witnesses remain to be examined. third petition for grant of regular weighs 44 grams of Buprenorphine category. He however does not dispute undergone an actual custody of more than case and that he is not involved in any Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Responding to the above, counsel though the second petition for grant of on 27.03.2025, however, thereafter 2 the petitioner contends that the present case and has remained in an actual custody of more than submitted that the petitioner is not Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic cited by the prosecution, only trial is progressing at a slow prosecution version is highly doubtful, manner of the petitioner’s arrest. It claim that the petitioner was seeing the police, he was in fact 23.07.2023 at about 5:30 PM, photographs of which have been other hand contends that 2 witnesses have been given up. examined. He further contends that bail and that the recovered Buprenorphine which shall fall in the dispute that the petitioner has than 02 years and 04 months in any other criminal case under Substances Act, 1985. counsel for the petitioner contends of regular bail was dismissed thereafter despite the matter having SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2025.12.05 17:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 222 CRM been listed for Hence, the period not likely to conclude 6. I have respective partie the present petition. 7. Taking above; the period the trial which is that the petitioner appropriate to enlarge trial Court. 8. The released on regular the satisfaction of 9. It is and shall not influence indirectly. 10. The expression on the on the basis of available 11. Pending 04.12.2025 Sumit Gusain CRM-M-63708-2025(O&M) as many as 07 occassions, no period of custody has exceeded beyond conclude soon. have heard learned counsel appearing parties and have gone through the documents petition. Taking into consideration the facts and period of actual custody undergone by is likely to take a long time to conclude petitioner is 22 year old and has clean enlarge the petitioner on regular The instant petition is allowed and the regular bail on his furnishing requisite of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate, is made clear that the petitioner influence any prosecution witnesses The observation made hereinabove the merits of the case and the Trial available material. Pending application(s), if any, shall (VINOD Whether speaking/reasoned : Whether reportable : 3 witness has been examined. beyond 02 years and the trial is appearing on behalf of the documents appended alongwith and circumstances as noticed by the petitioner; the stage of conclude coupled with the fact clean antecedents, I deem it bail to the satisfaction of the the petitioner is ordered to be requisite bail bond/surety bond to Magistrate, concerned. petitioner shall not extend any threat witnesses in any manner directly or hereinabove shall not be construed as an Trial Court shall decide the case shall stand disposed of. (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2025.12.05 17:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document