1 CRM-M-29389-2025 265 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-29389-2025 Decided on: 02.09.2025 Avinash ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present: Ms. Neha Shukla, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Pooja Nayar Sharma, DAG, Punjab. **** ANOOP CHITKARA, J. FIR No. Dated Police Station Sections 04 02.01.2025 City Malout, District Sri Muktsar Sahib, Punjab 21-C of NDPS Act 1. The petitioner incarcerated in the FIR captioned above had come up before this Court under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS], seeking regular bail. 2. Reply on behalf of the State has been handed over in the Court and the same is taken on record. 3. Petitioner’s counsel on instructions submits that petitioner was picked up from a burger shop, however now the possibility of the shop owner not supporting the petitioner’s case, cannot be ruled out because of fear of the police. However, parents of the petitioner have some digital evidence to prove their part. Counsel further submits that she has instructions to withdraw the present petition but parents of the petitioner be permitted to file a representation before the Director General of Police or the concerned Senior Superintendent of Police and if they do so, directions be issued to the concerned Officer to decide the same in a time bound manner. She further undertakes to provide all assistance in legitimizing the digital evidence recorded by them. 4. Given above, let the parents of the petitioner represent to the Director General of Police or the concerned Senior Superintendent of Police within 15 days from today, by providing all assistance by handing over all evidence including digital evidence. It is ANJU RANI 2025.09.04 15:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh 2 CRM-M-29389-2025 clarified that if parents of the petitioner files a representation with in the above- mentioned time period of 15 days, then, the same shall be decided by the concerned Director General of Police or the concerned Senior Superintendent of Police, within two months from that day either himself/herself or delegating the same to the officer holding IPS Cadre. It is further clarified that such order must be a reasoned order, and the same be communicated to the representationists as well as his counsel, without any delay. In the representation, petitioner to mention the e-mail-id of his counsel and himself so that the concerned officer could communicate them outcome. 5. There would be no need for a certified copy of this order, and any Advocate for the Petitioner and State can download this order and other relevant particulars from the official web page of this court and attest it to be a true copy. The concerned officer can also verify its authenticity and may download and use the downloaded copy for immediate use. Petition is disposed of as withdrawn with the above observation. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 02.09.2025 anju rani Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable: No. ANJU RANI 2025.09.04 15:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh