BNSS is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 12.07.2025, registered at Police Station Smalsar, District Moga, under Sections 22 and 29 NDPS Act. 2. custody for surfaced based on disclosure statement of co from whom alleged recovery of 15 effected, it being commercial quantity. and no evidence has also emerged to connect him to the case, but for the Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 12.07.2025, registered at Police Station Smalsar, District Moga, under Sections 22 and 29 NDPS Act. Learned counsel contends that the petitioner has been in custody for 4 months and 18 days. He alleges false implication. surfaced based on disclosure statement of co from whom alleged recovery of 15 loose effected, it being 2.79 grams of Etizolam commercial quantity. There is no recovery effected from the petitioner and no evidence has also emerged to connect him to the case, but for the yer in the present petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.73 dated 12.07.2025, registered at Police Station Smalsar, District Moga, under tends that the petitioner has been in He alleges false implication. His name surfaced based on disclosure statement of co-accused Gurprem Singh, loose intoxicating tablets, was 2.79 grams of Etizolam, marginally above the non- There is no recovery effected from the petitioner and no evidence has also emerged to connect him to the case, but for the PARVEEN KUMAR 2026.04.08 21:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. aforesaid disclosure statement, which is inadmissible in the eyes of law as per the judgment passed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Tofan Singh vs. State of Tamil Nadu, 2021 (1) RCR (Crl.) 1. Further that, he was granted interim bail by the trial Court, vide order dated 22.09.2025, however after receipt of the FSL report, he surrendered and never misused the said concession. Charges have been framed on 20.11.2025, however none out of 11 PWs has been examined. He is not involved in any other case. 3. Learned State counsel opposes the bail on the ground that there are specific allegations against the petitioner by the co-accused, who was apprehended at the spot alongwith intoxicating tablets. He is, however, unable to controvert the submissions with regard to stage of the case; the petitioner being not involved in any other case and he had never misused the interim bail. 4. Heard. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in particular that the petitioner is in custody for the last 4 months and 18 days; not involved in any other case; not misused the concession of interim bail; trial is likely to take a considerable time, thus his further incarceration would not serve any useful purpose, the present petition for grant of regular bail deserves to be allowed. 6. As a result, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail, subject to his furnishing bail/surety PARVEEN KUMAR 2026.04.08 21:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. bonds to the satisfaction of trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned and subject to his not being required in any other case. The petitioner shall abide by the following conditions:- (vii) The petitioner shall furnish his address and mobile number to the Trial Court forthwith and shall not change the same till the conclusion of the trial and in case for any reason, the petitioner seeks to change any of the aforesaid, the same shall be done only with prior intimation to the learned Trial Court, stating the reason for the same. 7. It is made abundantly clear that in case there is any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the State shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail as granted to the petitioner by this order. PARVEEN KUMAR 2026.04.08 21:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. 8. In view of the above, it is clarified that the observations made herein are limited for the purpose of present proceedings and would not be construed as an opinion on the merits of the case and the trial would proceed independently of the aforesaid observations. PARVEEN KUMAR 2026.04.08 21:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.