CRM-M-20947- IN THE H (227) VISHAL STATE OF HAR CORAM: HON Present: Mr. Mr. V *** MANISHA BATR 1. The Section 483 of Bh for grant of regul registered under S Substances Act Panipat. The prev and 19.11.2025. 2. Brief petition are that petitioner along w Kumar and Dhara 06-BA-3386, was -2026 (O&M) 1 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB A CHANDIGARH Versus HARYANA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANIS Anil Kumar Malik, Advocate for Mr. Vikram Singh, AAG, Haryana *** BATRA, J. (ORAL) The instant one is the third petition pr of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanh regular bail in case arising out of F nder Sections 20-C and 29 of Nar (for short “NDPS Act”) at Poli e previous two petitions was dismisse Brief facts of the case relevant for that on 24.07.2024, on the basis ong with co-accused Pardeep Singh, M Dharampal, while coming in a car be , was apprehended by a police party h JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH CRM-M-20947-2026 (O&M) Date of decision : 04.05.2026 ... Petitioner ...Respondent ANISHA BATRA ate for the petitioner tion preferred by the petitioner under a Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) ut of FIR No.449 dated 24.07.2024 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic t Police Station Samalkha, District smissed as withdrawn on 07.04.2025 ant for the disposal of the present basis of a secret information, the ingh, Manish @ Kala, Amit @ Amit car bearing registration number HR- party headed by ASI Randeep Singh. 2026 oner dent nder SS”) 2024 ropic strict 2025 esent , the Amit - ingh. AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.05 10:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-20947- On conducting the However, on searc Ganja were recov hired the car of D He was according produce any valid contraband, they w also nominated investigation and presently, the peti of aforementioned 3. It is a falsely implicated accused. He is i completed and cha no prosecution wi prolonged detenti served by keeping Singh, Manish @ been granted conc to be given the sa be allowed and the 4. Notic -2026 (O&M) 2 ing their personal search, no incrimin n search of the said car, two plastic ba recovered. It was revealed that the p r of Dharampal and the latter was not ordingly exonerated. Since the petitio valid license or permit to keep in t they were formally arrested at the sp ated in this case as accused. Aft n and usual formalities, challan was e petitioner along with the co-accused tioned offences. It is argued by learned counsel for t icated in this case. A false recovery w s in custody since 24.07.2024. nd challan has been filed. Conclusion ion witness has been examined so far etention entitles him to seek bail. eeping him in custody anymore. Co ish @ Kala, Sunil Kumar and Amit d concession of regular bail by this Co the same benefit. Therefore, it is urge and the petitioner deserves to be grante Notice of motion. criminating material was recovered. stic bags containing total 34 kgs. of the petitioner and co-accused had as not aware about their possession. petitioner and co-accused could not p in their possession the recovered the spot. Some other persons were d. After completion of necessary n was presented in the Court and ccused is facing trial for commission l for the petitioner that he has been very was planted upon him and co- 024. Investigation has since been lusion of trial is likely to take time as so far out of total 23 witnesses. His bail. No useful purpose would be e. Co-accused Anil Yadav, Pardeep Amit @ Amit Kumar have already his Court. On parity, he too deserves is urged that the petition deserves to granted benefit of regular bail. ered. s. of had sion. not ered were ssary and ssion been - been e as . His d be deep eady erves es to AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.05 10:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-20947- 5. Learn placed on record gravity of the al commercial quanti get benefit of ba against him. Mor maintainable. The offences again, if liable to be dismis 6. This C for the parties at co 7. As pe accused was foun aforementioned co bail. The previou withdrawn about s 01 year, 09 month ground to move f catena of cases tha of time, and the ba filed repeatedly. provide a new c circumstances. Th -2026 (O&M) 3 Learned State counsel has advance ecord custody certificate and has arg the allegations levelled against the quantity of contraband was recovered of bail as rigors of Section 37 of the . Moreso, the instant petition, being e. The petitioner may abscond or in ain, if extended benefit of bail. Hence dismissed. This Court has heard the rival submis es at considerable length. As per the allegations, the petitioner s found in conscious possession of ned contraband on 24.07.2024. This is revious petitions filed by the petiti about six months back. The petitioner months and 08 days. This factor, in ove for bail afresh. The Hon'ble A ses that an accused cannot be kept in c the bail application can be considered edly. It has also been held that eve new cause of action for filing a b es. This principle is a part of the broad ance notice of the petition. He has as argued that keeping in view the st the petitioner and the fact that vered from him, he is not entitled to f the NDPS Act would be attracted being a successive petition, is not or involve in committing similar Hence, it is urged that the petition is ubmissions made by learned counsel itioner along with above-named co- ion of commercial quantity of the This is the third petition for grant of petitioner, had been dismissed as itioner is in custody for a period for or, in the opinion of this Court, is a 'ble Apex Court has observed in a pt in custody for an indefinite period sidered on its own merits even if it is at every day spent in custody can g a bail application under certain e broader approach emphasizing that has the that ed to acted not milar on is unsel - f the nt of d as d for , is a in a eriod f it is can ain that AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.05 10:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-20947- law prefers bail o requirements of t ground for recon detention prior to prima facie make petitioner, howeve chances of conclu time as out of tot The petitioner has is well settled pro and long period of the NDPS Act. Re by Hon'ble Apex 2023 SCC OnLin undue delay in tria Act, given the im offence under the living conditions a imprisonment is reformed. Relianc of West Bengal, S 14.09.2023 and wherein the Hon'b who had been in -2026 (O&M) 4 bail over jail, aiming to balance the s of the criminal justice system. Pr consideration of bail since settle rior to trial should not become puni make out a case for commission of owever, on a perusal of the record, i conclusion of the trial in near future of total 23 prosecution witnesses, no er has remained in custody since long ed proposition of law that grant of ba riod of incarceration is to be considere ct. Reliance in this regard can be place pex Court in Mohd. Muslim @ Hu nLine SC352, wherein it was held th in trial cannot be said to be fettered u the imperative of Section 436-A of C er the Act. It was also observed that j itions are, more often than not, appall nt is that inmates are more likely eliance can also be placed upon Man al, Special Leave Petition (Crimina and Rabi Prakash v. State of Odish Hon'ble Supreme Court had extended een incarcerated for a long period ce the right of the accused with the m. Prolonged detention itself is a settled proposition of law is that e punitive. Though, the allegations ion of subject offences against the cord, it is apparent that there are no future and it will take considerable none has been examined so far. ce long. He has clean antecedents. It t of bail on account of delay in trial nsidered in the light of Section 37 of e placed upon the observations made Hussain v. State (NCT of Delhi). held that grant of bail on account of ttered under Section 37 of the NDPS A of Cr.P.C. which is applicable to that jails are overcrowded and their appalling. The danger of unjustified likely to be hardened rather than Manmandal and Another v. State inal) No.8656 of 2023 decided on disha, 2023 SCC Online SC110, tended benefit of bail to the accused eriod by observing that prolonged h the is a that tions t the e no rable far. ts. It trial 37 of ade hi). nt of DPS le to their tified than tate d on , used nged AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.05 10:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-20947- incarceration milit under Article 21 o principles must ov the NDPS Act. 8. Relia Chhattishgarh & pronounced verdic 37 of NDPS Act w as it comes with completion of tria held that appella commercial quant incarceration for a 9. Simil v. Central Bureau and inordinate del considered the cor including Section 436A (which requ not concluded wit would apply.
10. In th Crminal Appeal -2026 (O&M) 5 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 n 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 In the case of Ismail Khan @ Pa eal No.4911 of 2025 with regard 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 be enlarged on bail if the trial is the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Pathan vs. State of Rajasthan regard to recovery of commercial teed ional 7 of of ently ction r bail early ourt n of f her ntil ation hich ents, ction ial is 1973 an rcial AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.05 10:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-20947- quantity of narcoti of bail to the accus and 08 months of t 11. Simil No.15699-2025 tit and in the case of of 2025.
12. On an case in the light o petitioner has suf months and 08 da no prosecution w Co-accused have above. In view th of the petitioner is on record to show the trial or will a petition is allowed his furnishing pers trial Court, and su make any inducem of the case. He date of hearing ex -2026 (O&M) 6 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 08 days and the trial is not likely to b ion witness has been examined so f have already been granted concession view thereof, this Court is of the opinio oner is not likely to serve any fruitful show that if released on bail, the pe will abscond or indulge in similar llowed and the petitioner is ordered to g personal as well as surety bonds to and subject to the condition that he s ducement, threat or promise to any p He shall appear before the learned ing except when his presence has bee Supreme 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, 09 ly to be concluded in near future as d so far out of total 23 witnesses. cession of regular bail as mentioned opinion that the continued detention ruitful purpose. There is nothing the petitioner will not participate in imilar offences. Accordingly, the ered to be released on bail subject to nds to the satisfaction of the learned at he shall not directly or indirectly any person acquainted with the facts arned trial Court on each and every as been exempted by the trial Court. nefit years LP gal 72 esent t the r, 09 re as sses. oned ntion thing te in the ct to rned ectly facts very ourt. AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.05 10:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-20947- He shall surrende Aadhar card, and the trial.
13. It is, only for the purp bearing on the m 14. Since if any, is rendered 29.04.2026 Amit Sharma -2026 (O&M) 7 rrender his passport, if any furnish , and shall not change his mobile num It is, however, clarified that the obse pose of deciding the present petiti merits of the case. Since the main petition has been disp dered infructuous. (MA Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes Whether reportable:- Yes/No rnish details of his cell phone and le number(s) during the pendency of e observations made herein above is petition and the small shall have no disposed of, pending application, (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE Yes/No and cy of s o tion, AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.05 10:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.