CRM-M-16858 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND 293 Vikram State of Haryana CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present:- MANISHA BATRA, J. 1. petitioner under Section seeking regular bail in case bearing FIR No. under Section Act, 1985 previous petition, bearing number withdrawn 2. petition are that petitioner 900 grams of Sulfa (Charas) was effected from him. Upon interrogation, the petitioner nominated co persons, who had financed and helped him in proc completion of necessary investigation and usual formalities, Section 173 of Cr.P.C. was presented 16858-2025 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Versus Haryana CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Mr. Sandeep Kumar Goyat, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Neeraj Poswal, AAG, Haryana. MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral) The instant one is the second petitioner under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking regular bail in case bearing FIR No. under Section 20(b)(ii)C of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances 5 (for short ‘NDPS Act’)at Police Station previous petition, bearing number CRM withdrawn on 08.05.2024. Brief facts of the case relevant for the purpose of disposal of this petition are that on 13.10.2022, on the basis of a secret information, petitioner was apprehended by the police party and recovery of 18 kgs. and 900 grams of Sulfa (Charas) was effected from him. Upon interrogation, the petitioner nominated co-accused Parveeen Kumar and Amit Kumar as the persons, who had financed and helped him in proc completion of necessary investigation and usual formalities, Section 173 of Cr.P.C. was presented IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-16858-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 23.05.2025 ...Petitioner Versus ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Sandeep Kumar Goyat, Advocate Mr. Neeraj Poswal, AAG, Haryana. second petition that has been filed by the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking regular bail in case bearing FIR No. 385 dated 13.10.2022, registered Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances at Police Station Uklana, District Hisar. The CRM-M-9247-2024, was dismissed as Brief facts of the case relevant for the purpose of disposal of this on the basis of a secret information, was apprehended by the police party and recovery of 18 kgs. and 900 grams of Sulfa (Charas) was effected from him. Upon interrogation, the accused Parveeen Kumar and Amit Kumar as the persons, who had financed and helped him in procuring the contraband. After completion of necessary investigation and usual formalities, challan under Section 173 of Cr.P.C. was presented on 07.06.2023 in the Court and -1- 2025 (O&M) .05.2025 ...Petitioner ...Respondent has been filed by the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 , registered Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Uklana, District Hisar. The dismissed as Brief facts of the case relevant for the purpose of disposal of this on the basis of a secret information, the was apprehended by the police party and recovery of 18 kgs. and 900 grams of Sulfa (Charas) was effected from him. Upon interrogation, the accused Parveeen Kumar and Amit Kumar as the After under in the Court and MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.05.26 09:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-16858 presently, the petitioner commission o 3. has been falsely implicated in this case. upon him. Mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act were not complied with properly. The petitioner was in fact picked up from village Bithmada on 13.10.2022 Chowk, Uklana, where the recovered contraband was planted upon him. otherwise, investigation has since been completed presented way back on 07.062023. There are total 20 cited prosecution witnesses. However, none has been examined so far, which shows that trial is substantially delayed. is not invo required. In view of get benefit of bail. petitioner in custody anymore. It is, therefore, urged that the petition deserves to be allowed. 4. submitted therein and learned Assistant Advocate General, that the petitioner is not e spot and recovery of him.Hence, it is urged that 5. and have also gone through the record carefully. 16858-2025 (O&M) presently, the petitioner along with the co commission of aforementioned offence. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. In fact, upon him. Mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act were not complied with y. The petitioner was in fact picked up from village Bithmada on 13.10.2022 and was brought to a place near Railway line, Kundanpura Chowk, Uklana, where the recovered contraband was planted upon him. otherwise, investigation has since been completed presented way back on 07.062023. There are total 20 cited prosecution witnesses. However, none has been examined so far, which shows that trial is substantially delayed. The petitioner is in custody since 13.10.2022. He is not involved in any other case. His custodial interrogation is no more In view of the substantial delay in trial, the petitioner is entitled to get benefit of bail.No useful purpose would be served by keeping in custody anymore. It is, therefore, urged that the petition deserves to be allowed. Status report has been filed by the respondent submitted therein and learned Assistant Advocate General, that the petitioner is not entitled to get benefit of bail as he was nabbed at the spot and recovery of commercial quantity of the contraband Hence, it is urged that the petition is liable to be dismissed. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at and have also gone through the record carefully. along with the co-accused is facing trial for Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner In fact, a false recovery was planted upon him. Mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act were not complied with y. The petitioner was in fact picked up from village Bithmada on and was brought to a place near Railway line, Kundanpura Chowk, Uklana, where the recovered contraband was planted upon him. Even otherwise, investigation has since been completed and challan has been presented way back on 07.062023. There are total 20 cited prosecution witnesses. However, none has been examined so far, which shows that The petitioner is in custody since 13.10.2022. He His custodial interrogation is no more substantial delay in trial, the petitioner is entitled to No useful purpose would be served by keeping in custody anymore. It is, therefore, urged that the petition deserves Status report has been filed by the respondent-State. It is submitted therein and learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab has argued ntitled to get benefit of bail as he was nabbed at the commercial quantity of the contraband was effected from ition is liable to be dismissed. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at considerable length and have also gone through the record carefully. -2- is facing trial for Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner a false recovery was planted upon him. Mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act were not complied with y. The petitioner was in fact picked up from village Bithmada on and was brought to a place near Railway line, Kundanpura Even and challan has been presented way back on 07.062023. There are total 20 cited prosecution witnesses. However, none has been examined so far, which shows that the The petitioner is in custody since 13.10.2022. He His custodial interrogation is no more substantial delay in trial, the petitioner is entitled to No useful purpose would be served by keeping the in custody anymore. It is, therefore, urged that the petition deserves . It is has argued ntitled to get benefit of bail as he was nabbed at the was effected from length MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.05.26 09:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-16858 6. police party (Charas) was effected from obviously falls within the ambit of commercial quantity. However, a of the record 07.06.2023, no witness has been examined so far, although a peri 02 years has passed since then. The case is now fixed for recording the statements of the prosecution witnesses. there is no likelihood of the same to conclude in near future. in long incarce Court in Rabi Prakash vs. State of Odisha : 2023 Live Law (SC) 533 that the prolonged incarceration, generally militates against the most precious fundamental right guaranteed under Articl a situation, the conditional liberty must override the statutory embargo created under Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of the NDPS Act Hon’ble Supreme Court in 2024 (4) RCR (Criminal) 172 Muslim @ Hussain vs. State (NCT of Delhi) AIR(SC) 1648 regular bail to an accused, from whom commercial quantity of the contraband was allegedly recovered, has held that delay in trial Reference can also be made to the authority cited as Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2022(10) SCC 51 similar observations were made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Reliance can 16858-2025 (O&M) As per the allegations, the petitioner police party on 13.10.2022 and recovery of was effected from him. The quantity of the alleged contraband is obviously falls within the ambit of commercial quantity. However, a record reveals that despite the fact that challan was presented on 07.06.2023, no witness has been examined so far, although a peri 02 years has passed since then. The case is now fixed for recording the statements of the prosecution witnesses. there is no likelihood of the same to conclude in near future. in long incarceration of more than 02 years and 07 months. Rabi Prakash vs. State of Odisha : 2023 Live Law (SC) 533 he prolonged incarceration, generally militates against the most precious fundamental right guaranteed under Articl a situation, the conditional liberty must override the statutory embargo created under Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of the NDPS Act Hon’ble Supreme Court in Ankur Chaudhary vs. State of Madhya Pr 2024 (4) RCR (Criminal) 172. Reliance can also be placed upon Muslim @ Hussain vs. State (NCT of Delhi) AIR(SC) 1648, wherein Hon’ble Supreme Court, while granting concession of regular bail to an accused, from whom commercial quantity of the contraband was allegedly recovered, has held that grant of bail on delay in trial cannot be said to be fettered by Sect Reference can also be made to the authority cited as Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2022(10) SCC 51 similar observations were made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Reliance can the petitioner was apprehended by the and recovery of 18 kgs. 900 grams of Sulfa The quantity of the alleged contraband is obviously falls within the ambit of commercial quantity. However, a perusal despite the fact that challan was presented on 07.06.2023, no witness has been examined so far, although a period of about 02 years has passed since then. The case is now fixed for recording the statements of the prosecution witnesses. The trial is obviously delayed and there is no likelihood of the same to conclude in near future. The petitioner is ration of more than 02 years and 07 months. Hon’ble Supreme Rabi Prakash vs. State of Odisha : 2023 Live Law (SC) 533 has held he prolonged incarceration, generally militates against the most precious fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution and in such a situation, the conditional liberty must override the statutory embargo created under Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of the NDPS Act. Similar view has been taken by Ankur Chaudhary vs. State of Madhya Pradesh : Reliance can also be placed upon Mohd. Muslim @ Hussain vs. State (NCT of Delhi) : 2023 AIR(SC) 1648 2023 Hon’ble Supreme Court, while granting concession of regular bail to an accused, from whom commercial quantity of the contraband rant of bail on the ground of undue cannot be said to be fettered by Section 37 of the NDPS Reference can also be made to the authority cited as Satender Kumar Antil v Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2022(10) SCC 51, wherein similar observations were made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Reliance can -3- by the 18 kgs. 900 grams of Sulfa The quantity of the alleged contraband is perusal despite the fact that challan was presented on od of about 02 years has passed since then. The case is now fixed for recording the The trial is obviously delayed and The petitioner is Hon’ble Supreme has held he prolonged incarceration, generally militates against the most precious e 21 of the Constitution and in such a situation, the conditional liberty must override the statutory embargo created Similar view has been taken by adesh : Mohd. 2023 AIR(SC) 1648 2023 Hon’ble Supreme Court, while granting concession of regular bail to an accused, from whom commercial quantity of the contraband the ground of undue NDPS Act. Satender Kumar Antil vs. wherein similar observations were made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Reliance can MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.05.26 09:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-16858 also be pl Control Bureau : (2022) 2 RCR (Criminal) 706 this Court, right to speedy trial guaranteed under Art and the rigors enumerated under Section 37 of the convict/accused is not precluded from claiming bail invoking parameters of Article 21 of the Constitution of India Section 37 of the trial is substantially delayed. more required. provided under Section 37 of the NDPS Act can be dispensed with. Accordingly, also the ratio of law as laid down in the aforecited authorities, the considered opinio petitioner The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail, subject to his furnishing personal/surety bonds to the satisfacti Magistrate concerned. for cancellation of bail in case the subsequent case. 7. for the purpose of deciding the present petition and the same shall have no bearing on the merits of the case. 23.05.2025 Waseem Ansari 16858-2025 (O&M) also be placed upon the authority cited as Control Bureau : (2022) 2 RCR (Criminal) 706 this Court, after considering issue with respect to achieving balance between right to speedy trial guaranteed under Art and the rigors enumerated under Section 37 of the convict/accused is not precluded from claiming bail invoking parameters of Article 21 of the Constitution of India de Section 37 of the NDPS Act. In the present case, apparently and evidently, trial is substantially delayed. The custodial interrogation of the petitioner is no more required. Hence, given the peculiar facts of the case, provided under Section 37 of the NDPS Act can be dispensed with. Accordingly, keeping in view the aforementioned facts and circumstances and ratio of law as laid down in the aforecited authorities, the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be served by keeping in custody anymore. Accordingly, the present petition The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail, subject to his furnishing personal/surety bonds to the satisfacti Magistrate concerned. However, it will be open for the prosecution to apply for cancellation of bail in case the petitioner subsequent case. It is made clear that any observation made herein abo for the purpose of deciding the present petition and the same shall have no bearing on the merits of the case. .05.2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable the authority cited as Bhupender Singh vs. Narcotic Control Bureau : (2022) 2 RCR (Criminal) 706, wherein a Division Bench of after considering issue with respect to achieving balance between right to speedy trial guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the rigors enumerated under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, has held that convict/accused is not precluded from claiming bail invoking parameters of de-hors the stringent provisions of In the present case, apparently and evidently, The custodial interrogation of the petitioner is no given the peculiar facts of the case, the conditions provided under Section 37 of the NDPS Act can be dispensed with. the aforementioned facts and circumstances and ratio of law as laid down in the aforecited authorities, this Court is of no useful purpose would be served by keeping Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail, subject to his furnishing personal/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty However, it will be open for the prosecution to apply petitioner is found involved in any other It is made clear that any observation made herein above is only for the purpose of deciding the present petition and the same shall have no (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No -4- s. Narcotic , wherein a Division Bench of after considering issue with respect to achieving balance between icle 21 of the Constitution of India held that convict/accused is not precluded from claiming bail invoking parameters of ns of In the present case, apparently and evidently, the The custodial interrogation of the petitioner is no conditions provided under Section 37 of the NDPS Act can be dispensed with. the aforementioned facts and circumstances and this Court is of no useful purpose would be served by keeping the is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail, subject to his on of the trial Court/Duty However, it will be open for the prosecution to apply is found involved in any other ve is only for the purpose of deciding the present petition and the same shall have no MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.05.26 09:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document