CRM-M-24943-2024 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 217 CRM-M-24943-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision:- 02.05.2025 SUKHDEEP SINGH @ LADDI @ PURI ....Petitioner(s) Versus STATE OF PUNJAB ...Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY Present : Mr. B.S. Aulakh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Iqbalpreet Singh, AAG Punjab. ***** SANJIV BERRY, J. (ORAL) The instant petition has been preferred by the petitioner under Section 439 CrPC for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in the following case :- FIR No. Dated Sections Police Station 201 30.10.2022 22 (C) of the NDPS Act Sadar, Sri Muktsar Sahib, District Sri Muktsar Sahib, Punjab no. 2), Mo 2. It is, inter alia, contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He contends that the alleged recovery effected from the petitioner has been planted upon him and the petitioner has no concern with the same. He submits that the petitioner is in custody since 30.10.2022 and after the completion of investigation, challan has been presented in Court and the SANDAL SHARMA 2025.05.06 10:19 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CRM-M-24943-2024 (O&M) -2- conclusion of trial will take sufficient long time. Thus prayed for grant of concession of bail to the petitioner. 3. Per contra, learned State counsel while referring to the reply filed by the State has opposed the petition on the ground that the petitioner is a habitual offender and was apprehended by the police and commercial quantity of contrband was recovered from his conscious possession. Thus, keeping in view the provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of bail. Hence, prayed for dismissal of the petition. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. After considering the rival contentions and perusing the record, it transpires that as per the case of prosecution on 30.10.2022, the police party apprehended a boy, who on seeing the police party got perplexed and threw a polythene bag, which he was carrying in his right hand and tried to run away. Upon enquiry, the boy disclosed his name as Sukhdeep Singh (petitioner herein). Accordingly, the polythene bag was taken into possession, which was containing intoxicant tablets. It was found that the petitioner was having in his conscious possession 250 tablets of Crakdol-100 SR containing salt Tapentadol Hydrochloride and 50 tablets of Ralin-0.5 MD containing salt Etizolam, which he was carrying without any licence or permit. Accordingly, the petitioner was arrested and he is in judicial custody since then. The recovery of contraband effected from the petitioner falls within the ambit of commercial quantity, thus, hit by the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act. Moreover, as stated specifically stated in the reply filed by SANDAL SHARMA 2025.05.06 10:19 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CRM-M-24943-2024 (O&M) -3- the State, the petitioner is involved in two more FIRs registered under the NDPS Act, which shows that the petitioner is a habitual offender. 6. Therefore, in these circumstances, considering the serious nature that commercial quantity of contraband has been recovered from the conscious possession of petitioner, he is not entitled to the concession of bail at this stage. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed. 7. Any observation made above shall not be construed as opinion of this Court on the merits of the case. (SANJIV BERRY) JUDGE 02.05.2025 S.Sharma(syr) i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No ii) Whether reportable? Yes/No SANDAL SHARMA 2025.05.06 10:19 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment