CRM-M-34247 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND 218 Amarjit Singh @ Kaka State of Punjab CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present:- MANISHA BATRA, J. 1. petitioner under Section bearing FIR No. 29 of the ‘NDPS Act’) previous petition withdrawn on 14.02.2024. 2. petition are that Kumar @ Shiv was apprehended by a police party intoxicating tablets Since they could not produce any valid license or permit to possession the recovered drugs, they were formally arrested at the spot. completion of necessary investigation and usual formalities, 34247-2024 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Amarjit Singh @ Kaka Versus Punjab CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Mr. Sukhbir Maandi, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab. MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral) The instant one is the second petitioner under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bearing FIR No. 155 dated 09.07.2022, registered under Section of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 Act’) at Police Station City Tarn Taran, District Tarn Taran. previous petition, bearing number CRM withdrawn on 14.02.2024. Brief facts of the case relevant for the purpose of disposal of this petition are that on 09.07.2022, the petitioner Kumar @ Shiv was apprehended by a police party intoxicating tablets (Tramadol HCL and Pregabalin) Since they could not produce any valid license or permit to possession the recovered drugs, they were formally arrested at the spot. completion of necessary investigation and usual formalities, IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-34247-2024 (O&M) Date of decision: 31.07.2025 ...Petitioner Versus ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Sukhbir Maandi, Advocate Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab. second petition that has been filed by the 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail to him in case , registered under Sections 22(C) and Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short City Tarn Taran, District Tarn Taran. CRM-M-13630-2023, was dismissed as Brief facts of the case relevant for the purpose of disposal of this the petitioner along with co-accused Shiv Kumar @ Shiv was apprehended by a police party and recovery of 1368 (Tramadol HCL and Pregabalin) was effected from them Since they could not produce any valid license or permit to keep in their possession the recovered drugs, they were formally arrested at the spot. After completion of necessary investigation and usual formalities, challan under -1- 2024 (O&M) 31.07.2025 ...Petitioner ...Respondent has been filed by the in case s 22(C) and (for short City Tarn Taran, District Tarn Taran. The , was dismissed as Brief facts of the case relevant for the purpose of disposal of this accused Shiv and recovery of 1368 was effected from them. keep in their After under MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.08.01 18:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-34247 Section 173 of Cr.P.C. was presented presently, the petitioner commission of aforesaid mentioned offence. 3. has been falsely implicated in this case. upon him. Mandatory provisions of the NDSP Act were not properly complied with. Even otherwise, investigation stands completed and Conclusion of trial is likely to take time. The petitioner is in custody since 09.07.2022 that challan witnesses have been delayed and its conclusion would take a long time. be served by keeping him in custody anymore. petition deserves to be allowed. 4. Assistant Advocate General, Punjab has argued that keeping in view the gravity of the allegations, the petitioner is not entitled to get benefit of bail. Hence, it is urged that 5. and have also gone through the record carefully. 6. co-accused intoxicating tablets contraband 34247-2024 (O&M) Section 173 of Cr.P.C. was presented presently, the petitioner along with the co commission of aforesaid mentioned offence. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. In fact, upon him. He is not involved in any other case and has clean antecedents. Mandatory provisions of the NDSP Act were not properly complied with. Even otherwise, investigation stands completed and on of trial is likely to take time. The petitioner is in custody since 09.07.2022. There are total 11 cited prosecution witnesses. challan was presented in the Court on 04.01.2023, only two prosecution witnesses have been partly examined so far delayed and its conclusion would take a long time. be served by keeping him in custody anymore. petition deserves to be allowed. Status report has been filed by the respondent Assistant Advocate General, Punjab has argued that keeping in view the gravity of the allegations, the petitioner is not entitled to get benefit of bail. Hence, it is urged that the petition is liable to be dismissed. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at considerable and have also gone through the record carefully. As per the allegations, the petitioner and accused were apprehended by the police party and recovery of intoxicating tablets was effected from them contraband obviously falls under commercial quantity Section 173 of Cr.P.C. was presented on 04.01.2023 in the Court and along with the co-accused is facing trial for commission of aforesaid mentioned offence. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner In fact, a false recovery was planted He is not involved in any other case and has clean antecedents. Mandatory provisions of the NDSP Act were not properly complied with. Even otherwise, investigation stands completed and challan has been filed. on of trial is likely to take time. The petitioner is in custody since There are total 11 cited prosecution witnesses. Despite the fact on 04.01.2023, only two prosecution so far. Hence, the trial is substantially delayed and its conclusion would take a long time. No useful purpose would be served by keeping him in custody anymore. It is, therefore, urged that the has been filed by the respondent-State. Learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab has argued that keeping in view the gravity of the allegations, the petitioner is not entitled to get benefit of bail. 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. the petitioner and above co-accused by the police party and recovery of 1368 them. The quantity of the alleged commercial quantity. A perusal of the status -2- in the Court and is facing trial for Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner a false recovery was planted He is not involved in any other case and has clean antecedents. Mandatory provisions of the NDSP Act were not properly complied with. has been filed. on of trial is likely to take time. The petitioner is in custody since Despite the fact on 04.01.2023, only two prosecution Hence, the trial is substantially No useful purpose would It is, therefore, urged that the Learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab has argued that keeping in view the gravity of the allegations, the petitioner is not entitled to get benefit of bail. length accused 1368 The quantity of the alleged status MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.08.01 18:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-34247 report reveals that out of total 11 prosecution witn have been way back likelihood of the same to conclude in near future incarceration of more than Hon’ble Supreme Court in (SC) 533 has held that 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 view has been taken by Hon’ State of Madhya Pradesh : 2024 (4) RCR (Criminal) 172 be placed AIR(SC) 1648 2023 AIR(SC) 1648 granting concession of regular bail to an accused, from whom commercial quantity of the contraband was allegedly recovered, has held that on the ground of undue delay in trial 37 of the Satender Kumar Antil v 2022(10) SCC 51 Supreme Court. Reliance can also be pl Bhupender Singh v 706, wherein a Division Bench of this Court, respect to achieving balance between right to speedy trial guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the rigors enumerated under 34247-2024 (O&M) report reveals that out of total 11 prosecution witn have been partly examined so far, despite the fact that way back on 04.01.2023. The trial is obviously delayed and there is no likelihood of the same to conclude in near future incarceration of more than 03 years. He is not involved in any other case. Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rabi Prakash vs. State of Odisha : 2023 Live Law has held that the 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 view has been taken by Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh : 2024 (4) RCR (Criminal) 172 be placed upon Mohd. Muslim @ Hussain vs. State (NCT of Delhi) AIR(SC) 1648 2023 AIR(SC) 1648, wherein granting concession of regular bail to an accused, from whom commercial quantity of the contraband was allegedly recovered, has held that the ground of undue delay in trial cannot be said to be fettered by Sect 37 of the NDPS Act. Reference can also be made to the authority cited as Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2022(10) SCC 51, wherein similar observations were made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Reliance can also be pl Bhupender Singh vs. Narcotic Control Bureau : (2022) 2 RCR (Criminal) , wherein a Division Bench of this Court, respect to achieving balance between right to speedy trial guaranteed under icle 21 of the Constitution of India and the rigors enumerated under report reveals that out of total 11 prosecution witnesses, only two witnesses examined so far, despite the fact that challan was presented The trial is obviously delayed and there is no likelihood of the same to conclude in near future. The petitioner is in long He is not involved in any other case. Rabi Prakash vs. State of Odisha : 2023 Live Law 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 ble Supreme Court in Ankur Chaudhary vs. State of Madhya Pradesh : 2024 (4) RCR (Criminal) 172. Reliance can also Mohd. Muslim @ Hussain vs. State (NCT of Delhi) : 2023 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 cannot be said to be fettered by Sect Reference can also be made to the authority cited as s. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, wherein similar observations were made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Reliance can also be placed upon the authority cited as s. Narcotic Control Bureau : (2022) 2 RCR (Criminal) , wherein a Division Bench of this Court, after considering issue with respect to achieving balance between right to speedy trial guaranteed under icle 21 of the Constitution of India and the rigors enumerated under -3- two witnesses was presented The trial is obviously delayed and there is no The petitioner is in long He is not involved in any other case. Rabi Prakash vs. State of Odisha : 2023 Live Law 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 Similar Ankur Chaudhary vs. Reliance can also 2023 Hon’ble Supreme Court, while granting concession of regular bail to an accused, from whom commercial rant of bail cannot be said to be fettered by Section Reference can also be made to the authority cited as s. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, wherein similar observations were made by the Hon’ble the authority cited as s. Narcotic Control Bureau : (2022) 2 RCR (Criminal) after considering issue with respect to achieving balance between right to speedy trial guaranteed under icle 21 of the Constitution of India and the rigors enumerated under MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.08.01 18:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-34247 Section 37 of the from claiming bail invoking parameters of Article 21 of the Constitution of India de-hors present case, apparently and evidently, Therefore, keeping in view also the ratio of law as laid down in the aforecited authorities, the considered opinion that petitioner The petitioner is ordered to furnishing personal/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty 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. 31.07.2025 Waseem Ansari Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable 34247-2024 (O&M) Section 37 of the NDPS Act, has held that convict/accused is not precluded from claiming bail invoking parameters of Article 21 of the Constitution of hors the stringent provisions of Section 37 of the present case, apparently and evidently, Therefore, 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 satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty 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 above is only for the purpose of deciding the present petition and the same shall have no bearing on the merits of the case. 31.07.2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable held that convict/accused is not precluded from claiming bail invoking parameters of Article 21 of the Constitution of ns of Section 37 of the NDPS Act. In the present case, apparently and evidently, the trial is substantially delayed. 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. 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- held that convict/accused is not precluded from claiming bail invoking parameters of Article 21 of the Constitution of In the the trial is substantially delayed. the aforementioned facts and circumstances and this Court is of no useful purpose would be served by keeping the is allowed. 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 nvolved 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 MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.08.01 18:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document