CRM-M-42172- IN THE H (112) ABHI GILL STATE OF PUNJ CORAM: HON Present: Mr. Mr. A Mr. R MANISHA BATR 1. The regular bail in case Section 21 of the short “NDPS) at P 2. As pe duty, when a Poli coming on the ro running and had t On suspicion, he Kumar Sharma @ -2025 (O&M) 1 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB A CHANDIGARH Versus PUNJAB HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANIS Hitesh Chopra, Advocate with Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate for the pe Mr. Roshandeep Singh, AAG, Punjab **** BATRA, J. (ORAL) The instant petition has been preferre in case arising out of FIR No.105 date of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotrop S) at Police Station City Batala, Distric As per the allegations, on 06.06.2025 Police party reached near Hansli Dr the road. On seeing the police offic had thrown polythene envelope after n, he was apprehended. On asking, h ma @ Sunny. Recovery of 04 gram o JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH CRM-M-42172-2025 (O&M) Date of decision : 24.03.2026 ... Petitioner ...Respondent ANISHA BATRA the petitioner Punjab referred by the petitioner for grant of 5 dated 06.06.2025 registered under chotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for District Gurdaspur. 6.2025, while performing patrolling nsli Drain, a young person was seen officials, he got perplexed, started after taking it out from his pocket. , he disclosed his name as Anil ram of heroin was effected from the M) 2026 oner dent nt of nder (for lling seen arted cket. Anil the AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.24 18:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-42172- envelope thrown b the effect that the On the basis of h 26.06.2025 and dr also suffered a dis accused was arre recovered from h petitioner alongwi offences. 3. It is a falsely implicated accused which is said to be of the d complied with in t to be a ground to been recovered fro in the near future allowed. 4. Per c specific allegation since as many as 0 he stands convicte offences or abscon the petition does n -2025 (O&M) 2 rown by him. On interrogation, he su at the heroin was received from Abhi is of his disclosure statement, the pe and drug money of Rs.700/- was recov d a disclosure statement, on the basis s arrested on 12.07.2025 and 5 gra rom his possession. Investigation with the co-accused is facing trial It is argued by learned counsel for t licated in this case on the basis of di ich is not admissible in evidence. Re the drug money. Provisions of Sect ith in this case. His involvement in oth nd to deny him benefit of bail. Sma red from the co-accused. There are no future. It is, therefore, argued tha Per contra, learned State counsel gations are levelled against the petitio ny as 08 cases of NDPS Act are regist onvicted in 04 cases. There are chan absconding, if extended benefit of bai does not deserve to be allowed. suffered disclosure statement to Abhi Gill i.e. the present petitioner. the petitioner was apprehended on recovered from him. The petitioner basis of which Rahul Chandok, co- 5 grams 60 miligram heroin was tion now stands concluded and the g trial for commission of the subject l for the petitioner that he has been s of disclosure statement of the co- ce. Recovery of Rs.700/- cannot be f Section 50 of NDPS Act were not t in other cases cannot be considered . Small quantity of contraband had are no chances of conclusion of trial ed that the petition deserves to be unsel has argued that serious and petitioner. He is a habitual offender registered against him, out of which e chances of his committing similar bail. It is, therefore, stressed that nt to . d on ioner - was the bject been - ot be e not ered had trial o be and nder hich milar that AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.24 18:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-42172- 5. This C for the parties at co 6. The contraband to the co-accused. In To observed by Hon Section 67 of ND independent mater petitioner will be cannot be ignored petitioner. It is a m money or not? Th record, at this stag show that he was time. Investigation near future are ble this Court is of th by keeping the p above discussed fa of the case lest the and the petitioner personal and sure Judicial Magistrate -2025 (O&M) 3 This Court has heard the rival submis es at considerable length. The petitioner is alleged to have the co-accused. The name of the p Tofan Singh Vs. State of Tamil N Hon’ble Apex Court that the discl of NDPS Act, are inadmissible in ev t material. While the veracity of the di ill be tested during the course of tr gnored that no recovery of contraban t is a matter of evidence as to whethe The petitioner was arrested on 26 tage, to connect the petitioner eith e was connected with the co-accused tigation has been completed. Chances are bleak. Keeping in view the afore s of the considered opinion that no us the petitioner in custody anymore. ssed facts but without meaning to mak est the same prejudice the trial in any m itioner is ordered to be released on b d surety bonds to the satisfaction of gistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned. ubmissions made by learned counsel have supplied small quantity of f the petitioner was disclosed by the mil Nadu, (2021) 4 SCC 1, it was disclosure statements made under in evidence unless corroborated by the disclosure statement against the of trial, however, at this stage, it traband has been effected from the hether the recovered money is drug 26.06.2025. There is nothing on er either with the subject crime or to cused in any manner at the relevant hances of conclusion of trial in the e aforesaid facts and circumstances, t no useful purpose would be served ore. Taking into consideration the to make any comments on the merits n any manner, the petition is allowed d on bail, subject to his furnishing ion of the learned trial Court/Chief unsel y of y the was nder d by t the it the drug g on or to vant the nces, rved the erits wed hing hief AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.24 18:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-42172- 7. In the petitioner, it shall application seekin 8. It is, be construed as an and shall not influ 9. Since any, is rendered in 24.03.2026 Amit Sharma -2025 (O&M) 4 In the event of there being any FIR t shall be open to the respondent-State seeking cancellation of bail. It is, however, clarified that the obse d as an expression of opinion of this C t influence the outcome of the trial in a Since the main petition has been all ered infructuous. (MA Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes Whether reportable:- Yes/No y FIR/complaint lodged against the State to seek redressal by filing an e observations made above shall not this Court on the merits of the case ial in any manner. allowed, pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE Yes/No t the g an l not case n, if AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.24 18:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.