CRM-M-46850- IN THE H (121) NIRVAIR SINGH STATE OF PUNJ CORAM: HON Present: Mr. Ms. R MANISHA BATR 1. The Section 483 of Bh for grant of regul registered under Substances Act (fo Police Station Sad 2. As pe duty by the Polic seen coming from attempt to turn the of suspicion, he w -2025 (O&M) 1 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB A CHANDIGARH INGH @ GAGANA Versus PUNJAB HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANIS Lakshay Bector, Advocate for the Ms. Ruchika Sabherwal, Sr. DAG, Pu **** BATRA, J. (ORAL) The instant petition has been prefe of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanh regular bail in case arising out of under Section 15(c) of the Narco Act (for short “NDPS”) (Section 29 of Sadar Faridkot, District Faridkot. As per the allegations, on 23.01.2025 Police, a Scropio car bearing regist g from Faridkot side. Since the dri urn the vehicle back on noticing the P , he was apprehended. On asking, he JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH CRM-M-46850-2025 (O&M) Date of decision : 19.03.2026 ... Petitioner ...Respondent ANISHA BATRA for the petitioner G, Punjab preferred by the petitioner under a Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) ut of FIR No.14 dated 23.01.2025 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic 29 of NDPS Act Added later on) at 1.2025, while performing patrolling registration No.PB-29-M-8387 was he driver of the said vehicle made the Police party, hence on the basis ng, he disclosed his name as Nirvair M) 2026 oner dent nder SS”) 2025 ropic at lling was ade basis rvair AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.20 13:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-46850- Singh @ Gagna i.e Kgs. 820 Grams was formally arre accused Nirmal S now stands comple 3. It is a falsely implicated was not the owne recovery had been he was let off and stood established f had stated that it w accused Nirmal Mandatory provisi custody since long purpose would be of the petitioner ar on bail. 4. Per c allegations agains been recovered fro NDPS Act are a absconding or com thus, argued that th -2025 (O&M) 2 gna i.e. the petitioner. On conducting rams of poppy pods were recovered fro y arrested. He suffered disclosure sta mal Singh @ Nimma was nominated completed. It is argued by learned counsel for t icated in this case. A false recovery h owner of the vehicle and was not pr d been effected from the possession o ff and the petitioner was falsely implic ished from the disclosure statement of hat it was he who had brought the pop rmal Singh @ Nimma and had k provisions of NDPS Act were not com e long. The trial will take considerabl uld be served by detaining him in custo oner are clean. It is, therefore, argued Per contra, learned State counsel has against the petitioner. Commercial q red from his conscious possession. T are attracted in this case. There or committing similar offences, if e that the petition does not deserve to b ucting search, 04 bags containing 80 red from the vehicle. The petitioner ure statement on the basis of which inated as an accused. Investigation l for the petitioner that he has been very has been planted upon him. He not present at the spot. In fact the sion of Nirmal Singh @ Nimma but implicated. It is argued that this fact ent of co-accused Rajvir Singh, who he poppy pods at the instance of the had kept the same in his house. ot complied with properly. He is in iderable time to conclude. No useful n custody anymore. The antecedents rgued that he deserves to be released sel has argued that there are serious rcial quantity of the contraband had ion. The rigors of Section 37 of the There are chances of petitioner’s s, if extended benefit of bail. It is, e to be allowed. g 80 ioner hich ation been He t the a but fact who f the ouse. is in seful dents ased rious had f the ner’s It is, AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.20 13:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-46850- 5. This C for the parties at co 6. The possession of com petitioner are quit falls within the am the NDPS Act w placed on record b subject offence or or similar offence. bail, the petitioner to be unfounded. T there would be an the petitioner has However, these qu bail petition as t appreciating the en keeping in view th quantity of the co the conviction ma this Court is of the of regular bail, at t -2025 (O&M) 3 This Court has heard the rival submis es at considerable length. The petitioner is alleged to have of commercial quantity of contraband re quite serious in nature. The quantit the ambit of commercial quantity. Hen Act would certainly be attracted aga ecord before this Court so as to belie nce or in case, he is released on bail, h ffence. The apprehension of State coun itioner may abscond or indulge in sim nded. Trial is going on and there is no be any undue delay in conclusion of er has argued that there were several ese questions cannot be looked into as the same is to be decided by the entire evidence and material plac iew the gravity of allegations as leve the contraband recovered from him, th on may entail and the attendant facts of the considered opinion that no cas , at this stage. Accordingly, the prese ubmissions made by learned counsel have been found in conscious raband. The allegations against the uantity of the recovered contraband ty. Hence, the rigors of Section 37 of d against him as nothing has been believe that he did not commit the bail, he would not commit any such te counsel that, if extended benefit of in similar offences cannot be stated is nothing on record to suggest that ion of trial. The learned counsel for several lacunas in the investigation. d into at this stage while deciding a d by the learned trial Court after al placed on record before it. Hence, s levelled against the petitioner, the him, the quantum of sentence which facts and circumstances of the case, no case has been made out for grant e present petition is dismissed. unsel cious t the band 37 of been t the such fit of tated t that l for tion. ing a after ence, r, the hich case, grant AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.20 13:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-46850- 8. It is m the purpose of dec on the merits of th 19.03.2026 Amit Sharma -2025 (O&M) 4 It is made clear that any observation of deciding the present petition and t s of the case. (MA Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes Whether reportable:- Yes/No vation made herein above is only for and the same shall have no bearing (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE Yes/No for aring AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.20 13:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.