CRM-M-24084-2025 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 232 CRM-M-24084-2025 Decided on:11.08.2025 Gurdeep Singh @ Deepa …...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana …...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH Present: Mr. P.S. Sekhon, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. P.K. Jhanda, Sr. DAG, Haryana. **** SANJAY VASHISTH, J. 1. Present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), seeking regular bail in case FIR No. 56 dated 20.02.2022, under Sections 22-C and 31 of the NDPS Act, registered at Police Station Sadar Tohana, District Fatehabad. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that, as per the case of the prosecution, from the possession of the petitioner, 60 strips of Alprazolam IP 0.5 mg containing 10 tablets each, and 59 additional strips of Alprazolam IP 0.5 mg were recovered. Thus, a total of 119 strips weighing 239 grams were recovered, which exceeds the maximum commercial quantity prescribed under the NDPS Act, i.e., 100 grams. RASHMI 2025.08.11 19:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-24084-2025 2 3. Learned State counsel has filed a status report by way of an affidavit of Umed Singh, H.P.S., Deputy Superintendent of Police, Tohana, District Fatehabad, in Court today. Same is taken on record. Registry is directed to tag the same at appropriate place in the paper- book. 4. From the status report, particularly paragraph No. 4, which details other cases in a tabulated form, Mr. P.S. Sekhon, Advocate representing the petitioner, argues that petitioner is falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that petitioner deserves the concession of bail, especially considering that after being involved in three earlier cases under the NDPS Act and having been convicted therein, he is not found indulged in any such activity since then. Counsel further submits that although several other cases have been registered against the petitioner under Excise Act, but none relate to the offences under the NDPS Act, except the present one. Out of 27 cases, under the Excise Act, petitioner has been acquitted in 10 and convicted in another 10. Broadly, Mr. P.S. Sekhon, learned counsel for the petitioner, highlights that petitioner is a well-known individual to the local police officials, and despite having improved his conduct by staying away from drug or narcotics-related activities, he has once again been falsely implicated in the present case by planting the recovery of 119 strips of Alprazolam. He also submits that petitioner is in custody since 20.02.2022, and out of total 14 prosecution witnesses, only 02 have been examined till date. RASHMI 2025.08.11 19:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-24084-2025 3 5. This Court has considered the submissions made and the details of cases provided in the status report. For reference, same is reproduced herebelow: Sr. No. FIR No. Dated Under Section Police Station Present Status 1. 21 09.07.2004 15 NDPS Act Sadar Tohana Conviction 2. 46 23.02.2004 15 NDPS Act Adampur Convicted 3. 24 12.01.2004 15 NDPS Act Sadar Tohana Convicted 4 100 06.05.2018 Excise Act Sadar Tohana Undergone 5. 170 10.07.2018 Excise Act Sadar Tohana Conviction 6. 239 13.09.2018 Excise Act Sadar Tohana Undergone 7. 80 09.04.2019 Excise Act Sadar Tohana Undergone 8. 63 10.04.2020 Excise Act Sadar Tohana Undergone 9. 328 17.11.2020 Excise Act Sadar Tohana Undergone 10 05 13.01.2021 Excise Act Sadar Tohana Undergone 11 55 06.04.2021 Excise Act Sadar Tohana Undergone 12 215 13.10.2021 Excise Act Sadar Tohana Undergone 13. 152 21.07.2021 Excise Act Sadar Tohana Undergone 14. 297 24.10.2018 Excise Act Sadar Tohana Undergone 15. 219 28.08.1982 Excise Act Sadar Tohana Conviction 16 14 08.01.1993 Excise Act Sadar Tohana Acquittal 17 270 20.06.1993 Excise Act Sadar Tohana Acquittal 18 243 05.05.1995 Excise Act Sadar Tohana Acquittal 19 475 16.11.1995 Excise Act Sadar Tohana Acquittal 20 31 16.01.1995 Excise Act Sadar Tohana Acquittal 21 86 03.05.1999 Excise Act Sadar Tohana Acquittal 22 160 29.07.2002 Excise Act Sadar Tohana Acquittal 23 286 01.11.2003 Excise Act Sadar Tohana Acquittal 24 338 18.12.2003 Excise Act Sadar Tohana Acquittal 25 26 10.02.1982 Excise Act Sadar Tohana Status not found 26 134 15.03.1995 Excise Act Sadar Tohana Status not found 27 76 22.05.1997 Excise Act Sadar Tohana Status not found 28 236 07.10.2020 Excise Act Sadar Tohana Undertrial 29 276 16.12.2021 Excise Act Sadar Tohana Undertrial 30 41 06.03.2021 Excise Act Sadar Tohana Undertrial 31 101 31.05.2021 Excise Act Sadar Tohana Undertrial RASHMI 2025.08.11 19:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-24084-2025 4 6. Undoubtedly, the last case registered against the petitioner under the NDPS Act, in which he is said to have been convicted was registered on 23.02.2004. The present case has been registered after a gap of 19 years. Therefore, while considering the plea for bail, this aspect cannot be ignored, until the prosecution succeeds in proving the charges against the petitioner in the present case, registered on 20.02.2022. 7. Taking the circumstances in its entirety, and noticing the fact that petitioner was last involved in NDPS case on 23.02.2004, and in order to assess whether the petitioner has genuinely rehabilitated in society, this Court deems it appropriate to release him on bail rather than to detain him any longer. Moreover, the trial is not progressing at the required pace, as only two prosecution witnesses have been examined till date, despite the petitioner being in custody for the last 03 years, 05 months, and 15 days. Consequently, the prayer made in the present petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail, subject to his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case. 8. Any of the discussion done and recorded hereabove, shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the facts of the case. Therefore, trial Court is expected to decide the case by taking an independent view, on the basis of evidence available on record, as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law. RASHMI 2025.08.11 19:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-24084-2025 5 9. It is further made clear that if, in future, the petitioner is found to be directly involved in similar activities, the prosecution would be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail. 10. Petition stands disposed of. (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE August 11, 2025 rashmi Whether Speaking/Reasoned:YES/NO Whether Reportable: YES/NO RASHMI 2025.08.11 19:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document