CRM-M-52625 IN THE H (112) DHANANJAY @ STATE OF PUNJ CORAM: HON Present: Mr. Ms. S MANISHA BATR 1. The 483 of Bharatiya N of regular bail in under Section 21 o “NDPS”) (Sectio Police Station Jam 2. As pe patrolling near As seen coming on a them were appreh i.e. the present p thrown by them grams of heroin w 52625-2025 (O&M) 1 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB A CHANDIGARH AY @ DEEPU Versus
PUNJAB HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANIS Kanwaljeet Singh, Advocate for t 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.14 n 21 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotr ection 317(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sa n Jamalpur, District Police Commissio As per the allegations, on 04.07.2024 ear Ashiana Park, Mundian Kalan, Lud on a motorbike. The motorbike was pprehended and they disclosed their n sent petitioner and Sahil Kanda. T on the road side was also taken in roin was found. The motorbike use JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH
CRM-M-52625-2025 (O&M) Date of decision : 26.02.2026 ... Petitioner
...Respondent
ANISHA BATRA
te for the petitioner by the petitioner under Section , 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for grant 147 dated 04.07.2024 registered ychotropic Substances Act (for short aya Sanhita, 2023 added later on) at missionerate Ludhiana. 2024, the Police officials were on an, Ludhiana, when two youths were e was without number plate. Both of their names as Dhananjay @ Deepu a. The white polythene envelope ken into possession from which 270 ke used by them was found to be a M) 2026 ction grant tered short n) at on were of eepu lope 270 be a AMIT SHARMA 2026.02.27 10:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-52625 robbed one and of accused Sahil Kan petitioner and him 3. It is a falsely implicated involvement in o benefit of bail to h out of 16 prosecu be served by detai petition deserves 4. Status counsel has argue against the petiti contraband had be are attracted in th deserve to be exten 5. This considerable lengt 6. The p 07 months. Ther none out of 16 pro proposition of law 52625-2025 (O&M) 2 and offence under Section 317(2) of B il Kanda suffered disclosure statemen d himself in the crime. It is argued by learned counsel for t icated in this case. A false recovery ha t in other cases cannot be considere ail to him. The trial will take consider rosecution witnesses has been examin y detaining him in custody anymore. s to be allowed. Status report and custody certificate h argued that keeping in view the grav 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 There are no chances of conclusion prosecution witnesses has been exa of law that grant of bail on account of 2) of BNS was also added. The co- tement admitting involvement of the l for the petitioner that he has been very has been planted upon him. His sidered to be a reason for denying nsiderable time to conclude as none xamined. No useful purpose would ore. It is, therefore, argued that the icate have been filed. Learned State e gravity of the allegations levelled 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 more than 01 year and lusion of trial in the near future as en examined so far. It is well settled unt of delay in trial and long period - f the been His ying ne ould t the State elled ered DPS s not es at and re as ttled eriod AMIT SHARMA 2026.02.27 10:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-52625 of incarceration is 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 who had been in incarceration milit under Article 21 o principles must ov the NDPS Act. 7. Relia Chhattishgarh & pronounced verdic 37 of NDPS Act w as it comes with completion of tria 52625-2025 (O&M) 3 tion 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 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 ight 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 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 secution would press for an early d case, the Hon’ble Supreme Court Act. ble CC elay iven nder iving tified than tate on 33, used nged eed ional 7 of of ently ction r bail early ourt AMIT SHARMA 2026.02.27 10:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-52625 held that appella commercial quant incarceration for a 8. Simil v. Central Bureau and inordinate del considered the cor including Section 436A (which requ not concluded wit would apply.
9. In th Crminal Appeal quantity of narcoti of bail to the accus and 08 months of t 10. Simil No.15699-2025 tit and in the case of of 2025.
11. On an case in the light o 52625-2025 (O&M) 4 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 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 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 Pathan vs. State of Rajasthan regard to recovery of commercial 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 n of f her ntil ation hich ents, ction is 1973 an rcial nefit years LP gal 72 esent t the AMIT SHARMA 2026.02.27 10:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-52625 petitioner has suff and 07 months. prosecution witnes bail only because the petitioner is n record to show tha trial or will abscon 12. In vie case is made out f petition is allowed his furnishing pers trial Court/Chief J 13. In the petitioner, it shall application seekin 14. It is m the purpose of dec on the merits of th 15. Since any, is rendered in 26.02.2026 Amit Sharma 52625-2025 (O&M) 5 s suffered prolonged incarceration for . The trial is not likely to be co witness has been examined so far. T cause of his involvement in other case er is not likely to serve any fruitful ow that if released on bail, the petit abscond. 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 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
  
ion for a period of more than 01 year be concluded in near future as no far. The petitioner cannot be denied er cases. The continued detention of uitful purpose. There is nothing on petitioner will not participate in the n, 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. y FIR/complaint lodged against the State to seek redressal by filing an vation made herein above is only for d the same shall have no bearing een allowed, pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA)
Yes/No
year no nied on of g on n the hat a , the ct to rned 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.