CRM-M-4979-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-4979-2025 Reserved on: 03.02.2025 Pronounced on: 07.02.2025 Ram Babu Sahni ...Peoner Versus State of U.T. Chd. …Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present: Mr. Samay Singh Sandhawalia, Advocate for the peoner. Mr. Manish Bansal, P.P., U.T., Chandigarh with Mr. Navjit Singh, Advocate for the respondent-UT Chandigarh. **** ANOOP CHITKARA, J. FIR No. Dated Police Sta0on Sec0ons 06 13.04.2024 ANTF, UT Chandigarh 20, 29 of NDPS Act 1. The peoner incarcerated in the FIR caponed above had come up before this Court under Secon 483 of Bharaya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS], seeking regular bail. 2. As per paragraph 20 of the bail applicaon, the accused has the following criminal antecedents: Sr. No. FIR No. Dated Offense Police Sta0on 1. 494 08.07.2020 20 of NDPS Act Bhagwanpur 3. The facts and allegaons as per FIR (Annexure P-1) are that on 13.04.2024, based on chance recovery, the Police seized 20.342 Kg of ganja from the possession of co- accused Anil Swain @ Chandan and further recovered 9.5 Kg ganja from the possession of co-accused Rahul. The Invesgator claims to have complied with all the statutory requirements of the NDPS Act, 1985, and BNSS, 2023. 4. The peoner's counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent condions and contends that further pre-trial incarceraon would cause an irreversible injusce to the peoner and his family. 1 JYOTI 2025.02.07 15:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-4979-2025 5. The State’s counsel opposes bail. REASONING: 6. The quanty allegedly involved in this case is commercial. Given this, the rigors of S. 37 of the NDPS Act apply in the present case. The peoner must sasfy the twin condions put in place by the Legislature under Secon 37 of the NDPS Act. 7. The peoner’s involvement surfaced on the basis of disclosure statement and he was in touch with the main accused through phone and there is money transacon in between them through bank account and he was duly idenfied as regular visitor to Rahul. However, vide order dated 13.09.2024, the co-accused Rahul has already been granted bail by this Court in CRM-M-41550-2024. Thus, the peoner is entled to bail on parity. 8. As per paragraph 13 of the bail peon, the peoner has been in custody since 24.11.2024. As per the custody cerficate dated 03.02.2025, the peoner’s total custody in this FIR is 02 months and 08 days. Given the penal provisions invoked viz-a-viz pre-trial custody, coupled with the primafacie analysis of the nature of allegaons, and the other factors peculiar to this case, there would be no jusfiability further pre-trial incarceraon at this stage. 9. Without commenng on the case's merits, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, and for the reasons menoned above, the peoner makes a case for bail. This order shall come into force from the me it is uploaded on this Court's official webpage. 10. Given above, provided the peoner is not required in any other case, the peoner shall be released on bail in the FIR caponed above subject to furnishing bonds to the sasfacon of the concerned Court and due to unavailability before any nearest Ilaqa Magistrate/duty Magistrate. Before accepng the surety, the concerned Court must be sasfied that if the accused fails to appear, such surety can produce the accused. 11. While furnishing a personal bond, the peoner shall menon the following personal idenficaon details: 1. AADHAR number 2. Passport number (If available) and when the aLesng officer/court considers it appropriate or considers the accused a flight risk. 3. Mobile number (If available) 4. E-Mail id (If available) 2 JYOTI 2025.02.07 15:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-4979-2025 12. This order is subject to the peoner’s complying with the following terms. 13. The peoner shall abide by all statutory bond condions and appear before the concerned Court(s) on all dates. The peoner shall not tamper with the evidence, influence, browbeat, pressurize, induce, threaten, or promise, directly or indirectly, any witnesses, Police officials, or any other person acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case or dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Police or the Court. 14. Given the background of allegaons against the peoner, it becomes paramount to protect the members of society, and incapacitang the accused would be one of the primary opons unl the filing of the closure report or discharge, or acquiLal. Consequently, it would be appropriate to restrict the possession of firearms. [This restricon is being imposed based on the preponderance of the evidence of probability and not of evidence of certainty, i.e., beyond a reasonable doubt; and as such, it is not to be construed as an intermediate sancon]. Given the nature of the allegaons and the other circumstances peculiar to this case, the peoner shall surrender all weapons, firearms, and ammunion, if any, along with the arms license to the concerned authority within fiOeen days of release from prison and inform the Invesgator of the compliance. However, subject to the Indian Arms Act, 1959, the peoner shall be entled to renew and reclaim them in case of acquiLal in this case, provided otherwise permissible under the concerned rules. Restricng firearms would insll confidence in the vicm(s), their families, and society; it would also restrain the accused from influencing the witnesses and repeang the offense. 15. The condions menoned above imposed by this court are to endeavor to reform and ensure the accused does not repeat the offense and also to block the menace of drug abuse. In Mohammed Zubair v. State of NCT of Delhi, 2022:INSC:735 [Para 28], Writ Peon (Criminal) No 279 of 2022, Para 29, decided on July 20, 2022, A Three-Judge bench of Hon’ble Supreme Court holds that “The bail condions imposed by the Court must not only have a nexus to the purpose that they seek to serve but must also be proporonal to the purpose of imposing them. The courts, while imposing bail condions must balance the liberty of the accused and the necessity of a fair trial. While doing so, condions that would result in the deprivaon of rights and liberes must be eschewed.” 16. In Md. Tajiur Rahaman v. The State of West Bengal, decided on 08-Nov-2024, SLP (Crl) 12225-2024, Hon’ble Supreme Court holds in Para 7, “It goes without saying that if the peoner is found involved in such like offence in future, the concession of bail 3 JYOTI 2025.02.07 15:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-4979-2025 granted to him today will liable to be withdrawn and the peoner is bound to face the necessary consequences.” 17. This bail is condi onal, and the founda onal condi on is that if the pe oner indulges in any non-bailable offense, the State shall file an applica on for cancella on of this bail before the Trial Court, which shall be at liberty to cancel this bail. 18. The concerned trial court is authorized to delete, modify, or relax any of the above condions and shall be competent to do so in accordance with the law. 19. Any observaon made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments. 20. A cerfied copy of this order would not be needed for furnishing bonds, and any Advocate for the Peoner can download this order along with case status from the official web page of this Court and aLest it to be a true copy. If the aLesng officer wants to verify its authencity, such an officer can also verify its authencity and may download and use the downloaded copy for aLesng bonds. 21. Pe00on allowed in terms menoned above. All pending applicaons, if any, stand disposed of. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 07.02.2025 Jyo-II Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable: No. 4 JYOTI 2025.02.07 15:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.