CRM-M-6174-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-6174-2025 Reserved on: 03.04.2025 Pronounced on: 28.04.2025 Amandeep Singh @ Badshah ...Peoner Versus State of Punjab …Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present: Mr. J.K. Singla, Advocate and Ms. Shivani Singla, Advocate, for the peoner. Ms. Navreet Kaur Barnala, AAG, Punjab. **** ANOOP CHITKARA, J. FIR No. Dated Police Sta2on Sec2ons 241 30.11.2024 City Budhlada, Dis0. Mansa 20, 21, 22, 27, 29 of NDPS Act and Secons 111 and 223 of BNS, 2023 1. The peoner apprehending arrest in the FIR caponed above has come up before this Court under Secon 482 of Bharaya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS], seeking ancipatory bail. 2. As per paragraph 8 of the status report, the accused has the following criminal antecedents: Sr. No. FIR No. Dated Offenses Police Sta2on 1. 140 03.08.2019 20 of NDPS Act City Budhlada 2. 226 15.11.2022 21-A of NDPS Act City Budhlada 3. 133 22.08.2023 295-A, 153-A, 429 IPC, 3, 4, 8 of Cow Protecon Act City Budhlada 4. 84 27.06.2024 22, 29 of NDPS Act Sadar Barnala 3. The facts and allegaons are being taken from status report dated 15.02.2025 filed by the State. On 30.11.2024, a secret informaon was received qua the involvement of accused person in drug peddling. On 01.12.2024, a raid was conducted by the police party. At the me of raid, accused persons namely, Pawan Singh and Ranga Ram were arrested with 45 intoxicang capsules containing Pregabalin, 60 intoxicang capsules and 280 grams of Ganja were recovered from them respecvely. In addion to that, 150 grams of Ganja was effected from co-accused Dharma. The 1 JYOTI 2025.04.29 09:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-6174-2025 allegaons against the peoner are that he and remaining accused are members of a gang of drug paddlers and said gang is being operated by accused Lachho Devi. 4. Counsel for the peoner submits that he would have no objecon in case any stringent condions this Court might put upon the peoner including surrender of fire arms, and in case, peoner repeats the offence, where the sentence prescribes 07 years or more, the State shall file an applicaon for cancellaon of bail. He further contends that pre-trial incarceraon would cause an irreversible injusce to the peoner and his family. 5. The State’s counsel opposes bail and refers to the status report dated 15.02.2025. 6. It would be appropriate to refer to the following porons of the status report dated 15.02.2025, which read as follows: “4. The role of the peoner From the invesgaon proceedings, it was ascertained by the answering deponent that all the accused persons including the peoner had formed a gang of drug peddlers, out of which some gang members are engaged in procurement of drugs, some keep vigilance so as to easement in drug paddling and some are engaged in supply of drugs. Further, peoner Amandeep Singh @ Badshah is stated to be one of the member of the drug paddlers and the said gang is being operated by accused Lachhho Devi. 5. The evidence against the pe22oner From the invesgaon proceedings, it was ascertained by the answering deponent that as per the informaon given by the secret informer peoner Amandeep Singh @ Badshah is stated to be one of the member of the Gang dealing in the drug paddlers and the said gang is being operated by accused Lachho Devi. As such, role of the peoner is duly established, hence present case/FIR has been rightly registered against the peoner Amandeep Singh @ Badshah” REASONING: 7. Name of the peoner cropped up in the secret informaon, there is no recovery from the peoner, except the oral statement, nothing is on record to connect the peoner with the co-accused from whose possession recovery of contraband was effected. Given the undertaking by counsel for the peoner that in case the peoner 2 JYOTI 2025.04.29 09:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-6174-2025 repeats the offence where the sentence prescribed is seven years or more, then the State may file an applicaon for cancellaon of bail, as such, he is entled to bail. 8. As concerned for the involvement in drug trafficking, no recovery or acvity of the peoner with the drug peddler is available on record which are sufficient ground to grant bail to the peoner. 9. Given this, the rigors of S. 37 of the NDPS Act do not apply in the present case. 10. Secon 2 (vii-a) of the NDPS Act defines commercial quanty as greater than the quanty specified in the schedule. Secon 2 (xxiii-a) defines a small quanty as a quanty less than the quanty specified in the table of the NDPS Act. The remaining quanty falls in an undefined category, generally called an intermediate quanty. All secons in the NDPS Act specify an offence and menon the minimum and maximum sentence, depending upon the quanty of the substance. The commercial quanty mandates a minimum sentence of ten years of imprisonment and a minimum fine of Rupees One hundred thousand, and bail is subject to the riders mandated in S. 37 of the NDPS Act. When the quanty is less than commercial, the restricons of Secon 37 of the NDPS Act will not a0ract, and the factors for bail become similar to the offence regular statutes. 11. Pre-trial incarceraon should not be a replica of post-convicon sentencing. The evidence might be prima facie sufficient to launch prosecuon or to frame charges, but this Court is not considering the evidence at that stage but is analyzing it for the stage of ancipatory bail. An analysis of the above does not jusfy custodial interrogaon or pre- trial incarceraon. 12. The evidence collected might be prima facie sufficient to launch prosecuon or even to frame the charges; however, it is insufficient for the purpose of denying bail. 13. Given the penal provisions invoked, the legal admissibility of evidence collected against the peon, coupled with the prima facie analysis of the nature of allegaons, and the other factors peculiar to this case, there would be no jusfiability for custodial interrogaon or pre-trial incarceraon. 14. Given the above, 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 ancipatory bail. 3 JYOTI 2025.04.29 09:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-6174-2025 15. 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 Arresng Officer, and if the ma0er is before a Court, then the concerned Court and due to unavailability before any nearest Ilaqa Magistrate/duty Magistrate. Before accepng the surety, the concerned Officer/Court must be sasfied that if the accused fails to appear, such surety can produce the accused. 16. 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 a0esng officer/court considers it appropriate or considers the accused a flight risk. 3. Mobile number (If available) 4. E-Mail id (If available) 17. The bail order is subject to the peoner’s complying with the following terms. 18. The peoner is directed to join the invesgaon within seven days of uploading this order on the official webpage of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana and as and when called by the Invesgator. The peoner shall be in deemed custody for Secon 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872/ Secon 23 of BSA, 2023. The peoner shall join the invesgaon as and when called by the Invesgang Officer or any Superior Officer and shall cooperate with the invesgaon at all further stages as required. In the event of failure to do so, the prosecuon will be open to seeking cancellaon of the bail. During the invesgaon, the peoner shall not be subjected to third-degree, indecent language, inhuman treatment, etc. 19. 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. 20. Given the background of allegaons against the peoner, it becomes paramount to protect the members of society, detecon squad and incapacitang the accused would be one of the primary opons unl the filing of the closure report or discharge, or acqui0al. Consequently, it would be appropriate to restrict the possession of firearms. [This restricon is being imposed based on the preponderance of the 4 JYOTI 2025.04.29 09:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-6174-2025 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 fiPeen days 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 acqui0al 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. 21. 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.” 22. In case the Invesgator/Officer-In-Charge of the concerned Police Staon arraigns another secon of any penal offense in this FIR, and if the new secon prescribes a maximum sentence that is not greater than the secons menoned above, then this bail order shall be deemed to have also been passed for the newly added secon(s). However, suppose the newly inserted secons prescribe a sentence exceeding the maximum sentence prescribed in the secons menoned above; then, in that case, the Invesgator/Officer-In-Charge shall give the peoner noce of a minimum of seven days, providing an opportunity to avail the remedies available in law. 23. 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 granted to him today will liable to be withdrawn and the peoner is bound to face the necessary consequences.” 24. This bail is condional, and the foundaonal condion is that if the peoner indulges in any non-bailable offense, the State may file an applicaon for cancellaon 5 JYOTI 2025.04.29 09:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-6174-2025 of this bail before the Sessions Court, which shall have the liberty to cancel this bail. 25. Any observaon made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments. 26. 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 a0est it to be a true copy. If the a0esng officer wants to verify its authencity, such an officer can also verify its authencity and may download and use the downloaded copy for a0esng bonds. 27. Pe22on allowed in terms menoned above. All pending applicaons, if any, stand disposed of. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 28.04.2025 Jyo-II Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable: No. 6 JYOTI 2025.04.29 09:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.