IN THE 210 Ravi Kumar State of Haryana CORAM : HON'BLE Present :- Mr. Mr. Ms. VINOD S. BHARDWAJ The Bharatiya Nagarik petitioner in case Section 15(C) of at Police Station 2. Briefly party headed by that two persons, Ram, were engaged a narcotic substance registration No. intercepted the veh allegedly found vehicle, the police packed in 16 black were apprehended. THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-70763 Date of decision: VERSUS Haryana HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD Mr. Raahat Kataria, Mr. Bhavuk Datta, Mr. Karan Jangra, Advocates for the Ms. Chhavi Sharma, Astt. AG, Haryana ***** BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral) The instant first petition has been filed Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for case bearing FIR No.369 dated of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic City Fatehabad, District Fatehabad Briefly stated, the prosecution case is ASI Richhpal Singh received secret persons, namely Rahish, son of Devi Laland engaged in the business of selling poppy substance from Hisar towards Fatehabad HR-46-C-9284. Acting upon the vehicle during an interdiction operation. present as the conductor of the said police recovered 377 kilograms and black polythene bags, whereupon the apprehended. PUNJAB & HARYANA CHANDIGARH 70763-2025(O&M) decision: 19.12.2025 ...Petitioner ...Respondent VINOD S. BHARDWAJ Datta, Mr. Anmol Tuteja and petitioner. Haryana. filed under Section 483 of the grant of regular bail to the 15.08.2024 registered under Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 Fatehabad. is that on 15.08.2024, a police secret information to the effect Laland Ravi Kumar, son of Fusa poppy husk and were transporting Fatehabad in a tralla bearing the said information, the police operation. The petitioner was said tralla. Upon search of the and 980 grams of poppy husk he petitioner and other accused SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2025.12.19 19:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2 210 CRM-M-70763-2025(O&M) 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner was merely engaged as a temporary conductor of the vehicle and had no ownership, control, or dominion over the tralla in which the contraband was recovered. It is contended that the narcotic substance was loaded in the tralla without the petitioner’s knowledge and that he was wholly unaware of the contents being transported. Learned counsel further submits that, as per the prosecution version itself, the consignment was loaded by the driver of the vehicle at the behest of the recipient, namely Suresh Kumar and not at the instance of the petitioner. It is further argued that the petitioner is not involved in any other case under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and has clean antecedents. The petitioner has remained in custody since 15.08.2024. It is also submitted that the trial is yet to commence and not a single prosecution witness has been examined till date, indicating that the conclusion of trial is likely to take a long time. 4. Learned State counsel does not dispute the aforesaid factual position and fairly concedes that, out of the 37 prosecution witnesses cited, not even a single witness has been examined so far. She further submits that although the anticipatory bail petition filed by the co-accused, namely Suresh Kumar, had earlier been dismissed, he has since been granted the concession of regular bail. It is further submitted that, as per the prosecution case, the consignment was intended to be delivered to the said Suresh Kumar and that he was in contact with the driver of the offending vehicle, namely Rahish. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respective parties and have gone through the documents appended along with the present petition. SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2025.12.19 19:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 3 210 CRM-M-70763-2025(O&M) 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances noticed hereinabove, the period of custody already undergone by the petitioner, the stage of the trial and the absence of any criminal antecedents of the petitioner under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, I deem it appropriate to allow the present petition. 7. The instant petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bail bond/surety bond to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned. 8. It is made clear that the petitioner shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witnesses in any manner directly or indirectly. 9. The observation made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case and the Trial Court shall decide the case on the basis of available material. 10. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. 19.12.2025 (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) Sumit Gusain JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2025.12.19 19:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document