CRM-M-73945- IN THE H (125) JARAMANPREE STATE OF PUNJ CORAM: HON Present: Mr. Ms. S MANISHA BATR 1. The 483 of Bharatiya N of regular bail in under Sections 21 Substances Act (fo of IPC at Police St 2. As p information to the accused Charanjit was involved in th -2025 (O&M) 1 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB A CHANDIGARH PREET SINGH @ JARMAN Versus
PUNJAB HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANIS Rishu Mahajan, Advocate for the Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab ****
BATRA, J. (ORAL)
The instant petition has been filed atiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in case arising out of FIR No.52 ons 21(C), 25, 29 and 27A of Narc Act (for short “NDPS”) and Section 25 lice Station Chheharta, District Amrits As per the allegations, on 29.03.2 to the effect that accused Gagandeep aranjit Singh @ Charan and Harmande d in the business of sale of contraband JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH
CRM-M-73945-2025 (O&M) Date of decision : 26.02.2026 ... Petitioner ...Respondent ANISHA BATRA
for the petitioner by the petitioner under Section , 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for grant 52 dated 29.03.2024 registered f Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic tion 25 of Arms Act and Section 201 Amritsar. 9.03.2024, on receipt of a secret ndeep Singh @ Gagan alongwith co- mandeep Sngh @ Harman @ Happy raband and on that very day, all three M) 2026 oner
dent
ction grant tered ropic 201 ecret - appy three AMIT SHARMA 2026.02.27 10:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-73945- of them were com and they could be & ammunitions, and laid a barricad Miri Piri Academy the said vehicle tri apprehended. On conducting perso countrymade pist recovered from hi colour polythene b of heroin and drug of them were f ammunition and th 3. As pe Gagan suffered a d Yuvraj Singh wh currently lodged i engage in the bus money and had f accused Yuvraj Si accused Charanjit with him. They u -2025 (O&M) 2 re coming in a Baleno Car bearing re uld be apprehended with huge quantity a raiding party was formed which icade. The above said vehicle was cademy. The same was stopped by th icle tried to flee away by opening the d. On asking they disclosed their personal search of accused Gagan e pistol .32 bore alongwith 3 rou rom his conscious possession. On sea thene bag was recovered. The same w drug money of Rs.50,000/- was also ere formally arrested. The recov and the vehicle were also taken into c As per the further allegations, the red a disclosure statement on 29.03.20 h who was having links with Pakis dged in Central Jail, Goindwal Sahib, he business of sale of contraband in had further asked him to download vraj Singh, he had downloaded the sa ranjit Singh @ Charan and Harmande hey used to go to the villages near th ring registration No.PB-02-ED-7097 uantity of contraband and illicit arms which reached at the informed place le was seen coming from the side of d by the Police. Three occupants of ng the doors of the car but they were their names and particulars. On Gagandeep Singh @ Gagan, 01 3 rounds of live cartridges were On searching the vehicle, one black same was containing 01 Kg 500 gm as also recovered from the same. All recovered contraband, arms and into custody. , the accused Gagandeep Singh @ .03.2024 disclosing that the accused Pakistani smugglers and who was Sahib, Tarn Taran had asked him to nd in lieu of handsome amount of wnload Zangi App. On asking of the said App and also engaged co- mandeep Singh @ Harman @ Happy ear the Indo-Pak border and used to 7097 arms place de of ts of were On , 01 were lack gm . All and h @ used was m to nt of g of - appy ed to AMIT SHARMA 2026.02.27 10:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-73945- pick up heroin th unknown persons they were paid m Lovejeet Singh @ grams of heroin to Rahul just one day 4. The c co-accused Loveje 700 grams of hero houses, respective Yuvraj Singh was 5. It is a falsely implicated accused Gagande evidence. A fal antecedents. The purpose would be Paras Singh @ P parity, he too dese that the petition de 6. Status counsel has argue -2025 (O&M) 3 roin thrown by Pakistani drones wh rsons at different places, as per direc paid money. He also disclosed th ngh @ Rahul were also involved with roin to the petitioner and 800 grams ne day back. The case further set up by the State is Lovejeet Singh @ Rahul were arrested f heroin and 08 grams of contraband pectively, which was taken into cus h was arrested. Investigation now stan It is argued by learned counsel for t cated in this case on the basis of the d gandeep Singh which cannot be co A false recovery has been planted . The trial will take considerable uld be served by detaining him in cust @ Paras Singh have already been o deserves to be extended the same b tion deserve to be allowed. Status report and custody certificate h argued that keeping in view the grav which was further supplied to r direction of Yuvraj Singh and then ed that the present petitioner and d with him and that he had sold 700 rams of heroin to Lovejeet Singh @ tate is that the present petitioner and rrested on 29.03.2024. Recovery of aband heroin was effected from their to custody. Subsequently, accused w stands completed. l for the petitioner that he has been f the disclosure statement of the co- be considered to be admissible in lanted upon him. He has clean time to conclude. No useful n custody anymore. The co-accused been extended benefit of bail. On ame benefit. It is, therefore, argued icate have been filed. Learned State e gravity of the allegations levelled to then and 700 h @ r and ry of their sed been - le in clean seful used On gued State elled AMIT SHARMA 2026.02.27 10:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-73945- against the petiti contraband had be are attracted in th deserve to be exten 7. This considerable lengt 8. The p 21 days. There are prosecution witnes law that grant o incarceration is to Reliance in this re Apex Court in Mo OnLine SC 352, in trial cannot be the imperative of S the Act. It was conditions are, m imprisonment is reformed. Relianc of West Bengal, S 14.09.2023 and R wherein the Hon’b -2025 (O&M) 4 petitioner, the fact that the comm had been recovered from him. The rig in this case. It is, therefore, argue e extended benefit of bail. This Court has heard the rival subm e length. The petitioner is in custody for a per ere are no chances of conclusion of tri witnesses has been examined so far. I rant of bail on account of delay n is to be considered in the light of this regard can be placed upon the o n Mohd. Muslim @ Hussain v. Sta 52, wherein it was held that grant of ot be said to be fettered under Sectio ve of Section 436-A of Cr.P.C. which was also observed that jails are o are, more often than not, appalling nt is that inmates are more likely eliance can also be placed upon Man al, Special Leave Petition (Criminal nd Rabi Prakash v. State of Odis Hon’ble Supreme Court had extended commercial quantity of recovered he rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS argued that the petitioner does not submissions made by the parties at r a period of 01 year, 10 months and n of trial in the near future as only 01 far. It is well settled proposition of elay in trial and long period of ht of Section 37 of the NDPS Act. the observations made by Hon’ble . State (NCT of Delhi), 2023 SCC ant of bail on account of undue delay Section 37 of the NDPS Act, given which is applicable to offence under are overcrowded and their living palling. The danger of unjustified likely to be hardened rather than Manmandal and Another v. State inal) No.8656 of 2023 decided on Odisha, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 533, tended benefit of bail to the accused ered DPS s not es at and 1 on of d of Act. ble CC elay iven nder iving tified than tate on 33, used AMIT SHARMA 2026.02.27 10:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-73945- who had been in incarceration milit under Article 21 principles must ov the NDPS Act. 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 w would apply.
-2025 (O&M) 5 een incarcerated for a long period n militated against the most precious le 21 of the Constitution and in such ust override the statutory embargo c 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 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 eriod by observing that prolonged ecious fundamental right guaranteed such a situation, the constitutional argo contained under Section 37 of 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 nged teed ional 7 of of ently ction r bail early ourt n of f her ntil ation hich ents, ction ial is 1973 AMIT SHARMA 2026.02.27 10:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-73945- 11. In th Crminal Appeal quantity of narcoti 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 suf months and 21 da only 01 prosecutio antecedents. The fruitful purpose. T petitioner will not 14. In vie case is made out f petition is allowed his furnishing pers trial Court/Chief J -2025 (O&M) 6 In the case of Ismail Khan @ Pa eal No.4911 of 2025 with regard narcotic substance, the Hon’ble Supre e accused in view of prolonged incarce ths of the accused.
Similar 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 21 days. The trial is not likely to b secution witness has been examined s The continued detention of the petiti ose. There is nothing on record to sho ill not participate in the trial or will ab 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 Pathan vs. State of Rajasthan regard to recovery of commercial reme Court accorded the benefit 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 ts and circumstances of the present nciples of law, it transpires that the ration for a period of 01 year, 10 ly to be concluded in near future as ined so far. The petitioner has clean e petitioner is not likely to serve any to show that if released on bail, the ill abscond. 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. an rcial nefit years LP gal 72 esent t the 0 re as clean any l, the hat a , the ct to rned AMIT SHARMA 2026.02.27 10:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-73945- 15. In the petitioner, it shall application seekin 16. It is m the purpose of dec on the merits of th 17. Since any, is rendered in 26.02.2026 Amit Sharma -2025 (O&M) 7 In the event of there being any FIR t shall be open to the respondent-State seeking cancellation of bail. It is made clear that any observation of deciding the present petition and t s of the case. Since the main petition has been all ered infructuous. (MA Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes
  
y FIR/complaint lodged against the State to seek redressal by filing an vation made herein above is only for and the same shall have no bearing allowed, pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA)
Yes/No
t the g an for aring n, if AMIT SHARMA 2026.02.27 10:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.