CWP-31737 IN THE 201 Aakash State of Haryana CORAM: Present : HARPREET SINGH BRAR 1. Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking regular bail in case bearing FIR No. registered at Police Station Bahalgarh, District Sonipat (Haryana). 2. on secret information, a police te Anil, Keshav and the petitioner in conscious possession of contraband i.e. 27 Kg 150 grams of grams of doda commercial quantity and thus, the present case. 1 31737-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM Date of Decision: VERSUS State of Haryana HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Mr. Vivek Sheoran, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Vikrant Pamboo, Addl. AG Haryana. HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (Oral) The present petition has been filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking regular bail in case bearing FIR No.48 dated 09.02.2025 under Sections 15 and 29 of NDPS Act registered at Police Station Bahalgarh, District Sonipat (Haryana). Succinctly, the facts of the case are than on 09.02.2025 based on secret information, a police team headed by ASI Sandeep, apprehended Anil, Keshav and the petitioner in conscious possession of contraband i.e. 27 Kg 150 grams of churapost, 20 kg 550 grams of doda in three separate plastic bags, cumulatively falling in commercial quantity and thus, the present case. HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-31737-2025 Date of Decision: September 26, 2025 .....Petitioner VERSUS ...Respondent HARPREET SINGH BRAR for the petitioner. Vikrant Pamboo, Addl. AG Haryana. petition has been filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking regular bail in case 48 dated 09.02.2025 under Sections 15 and 29 of NDPS Act registered at Police Station Bahalgarh, District Sonipat (Haryana). Succinctly, the facts of the case are than on 09.02.2025 based m headed by ASI Sandeep, apprehended Anil, Keshav and the petitioner in conscious possession of contraband i.e. 27 ams of churapost and 12 kg 900 in three separate plastic bags, cumulatively falling in commercial quantity and thus, the present case. , 2025 .....Petitioner ...Respondents petition has been filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking regular bail in case 48 dated 09.02.2025 under Sections 15 and 29 of NDPS Act Succinctly, the facts of the case are than on 09.02.2025 based m headed by ASI Sandeep, apprehended Anil, Keshav and the petitioner in conscious possession of contraband i.e. 27 and 12 kg 900 in three separate plastic bags, cumulatively falling in CHETAN THAKUR 2025.09.26 19:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CWP-31737 3. the case set up by the prosecution, petitioner, were apprehended at the spot and from all three of them, about 60 kg of poppy husk was recovered. The entire bulk was weighed along with three separate plastic bag then the contraband might be below the commercial quantity is behind the bars marginally higher than the commercial quantity. final report present witnesses, only one prosecution witness has been examined further submitted that time and hence, behind the bars. Lastly, he prayed for the petitioner. 4. opposes the grant of regular bail to the petitioner on the ground that complicity of t However, he could not controvert the fact that investigation of the case is complete and submitted that keeping in view the gravity and s petitioner does not deserves the concession of regular bail. 5. the record of the case petitioner is behind the 2 31737-2025 Learned counsel for the petitioner the case set up by the prosecution, three persons, namely, Anil, Keshav , were apprehended at the spot and from all three of them, about 60 kg of poppy husk was recovered. The entire bulk was weighed along with three separate plastic bags and in case if plastic bags are weighed then the contraband might be below the commercial quantity is behind the bars since 09.02.2025. Further, the contraband recovered is marginally higher than the commercial quantity. final report presented; charges have already been framed witnesses, only one prosecution witness has been examined further submitted that trial of the present case would take sufficient long hence, no purpose would be served by keeping behind the bars. Lastly, he prayed for grant of the petitioner. Learned State counsel on instructions from ASI Pardeep opposes the grant of regular bail to the petitioner on the ground that complicity of the petitioner is duly established during investigation. However, he could not controvert the fact that investigation of the case is and petitioner is not involved in any other submitted that keeping in view the gravity and s petitioner does not deserves the concession of regular bail. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the record of the case file with their able assistance petitioner is behind the bars since 09. Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that as per three persons, namely, Anil, Keshav and , were apprehended at the spot and from all three of them, about 60 kg of poppy husk was recovered. The entire bulk was weighed along with s and in case if plastic bags are weighed separately then the contraband might be below the commercial quantity. The petitioner . Further, the contraband recovered is marginally higher than the commercial quantity. He further submitted that ed; charges have already been framed and out of total 18 witnesses, only one prosecution witness has been examined so far. He of the present case would take sufficient long no purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner grant of concession of regular bail to on instructions from ASI Pardeep opposes the grant of regular bail to the petitioner on the ground that he petitioner is duly established during investigation. However, he could not controvert the fact that investigation of the case is petitioner is not involved in any other NDPS case. He further submitted that keeping in view the gravity and seriousness of offence, petitioner does not deserves the concession of regular bail. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusing file with their able assistance, it transpires that the 09.02.2025; upon completion of contends that as per and , were apprehended at the spot and from all three of them, about 60 kg of poppy husk was recovered. The entire bulk was weighed along with separately . The petitioner . Further, the contraband recovered is He further submitted that out of total 18 . He of the present case would take sufficient long the petitioner concession of regular bail to on instructions from ASI Pardeep, opposes the grant of regular bail to the petitioner on the ground that he petitioner is duly established during investigation. However, he could not controvert the fact that investigation of the case is He further eriousness of offence, Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusing , it transpires that the upon completion of CHETAN THAKUR 2025.09.26 19:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CWP-31737 investigation before the concerned Court the petitioner. Further total 18 prosecution witnesses, examined so far time. Further, time of trial petitioner behind the bars detention without the prospect of the trial being concluded in the near future, would be violative of his rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. 6. Kumar Antil v. CBI’ conditions of undertrial prisoner in India has observed: 7. threshold for commercial quantity of the alleged contraband, this Court has found it proper to grant regular bail. Reference in this regard can be made to 3 31737-2025 nvestigation, final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. before the concerned Court; and charges have already been framed against the petitioner. Further trial of the case has not made much progress as out of 18 prosecution witnesses, only one prosecution witness examined so far. As such, the conclusion of trial would take sufficient long time. Further, culpability of petitioner, if any, woul time of trial and hence no useful purpose behind the bars. As such, keeping the petitioner in further detention without the prospect of the trial being concluded in the near future, violative of his rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. A two Judge Bench of Hon’ble Supreme Court in ‘ Kumar Antil v. CBI’ (2022) 10 SCC 51 conditions of undertrial prisoner in India has observed: “6. Jails in India are flooded with undertrial prisoners. The statistics placed before us would indicate that more than 2/3rd of the inmates of the prisons constitute undertrial prisoners. Of this category of prisoners, majority may not even be required to be arrested despite registration of a cognizable offence, being charged with offences punishable for seven years or less. They are not only poor and illiterate but also would include women. Thus, there is a culture of offence being inherited by many of them. As observed by this Court, it certainly exhibits the mindset, a vestige of colonial India, on the part of the investigating agency, notwithstanding the fact arrest is a draconian measure resulting in curtailment of liberty, and thus to be used sparingly. In a democracy, there can never be an impression that it is a police State as both are conceptually opposite to each other.” In cases where the recovery only marginally breaches the threshold for commercial quantity of the alleged contraband, this Court has found it proper to grant regular bail. Reference in this regard can be made to final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. has been presented charges have already been framed against trial of the case has not made much progress as out of only one prosecution witness has been conclusion of trial would take sufficient long , if any, would be determined at the useful purpose would be served by keeping the eeping the petitioner in further detention without the prospect of the trial being concluded in the near future, violative of his rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. A two Judge Bench of Hon’ble Supreme Court in ‘Satender (2022) 10 SCC 51, with respect to prevailing conditions of undertrial prisoner in India has observed: . Jails in India are flooded with undertrial prisoners. The statistics placed before us would indicate that more than 2/3rd of the inmates of the prisons constitute undertrial prisoners. Of this category of prisoners, majority may not even be required to e arrested despite registration of a cognizable offence, being charged with offences punishable for seven years or less. They are not only poor and illiterate but also would include women. Thus, there is a culture of offence being inherited by many of . As observed by this Court, it certainly exhibits the mindset, a vestige of colonial India, on the part of the investigating agency, notwithstanding the fact arrest is a draconian measure resulting in curtailment of liberty, and thus In a democracy, there can never be an impression that it is a police State as both are conceptually In cases where the recovery only marginally breaches the threshold for commercial quantity of the alleged contraband, this Court has found it proper to grant regular bail. Reference in this regard can be made to presented charges have already been framed against trial of the case has not made much progress as out of has been conclusion of trial would take sufficient long d be determined at the the eeping the petitioner in further detention without the prospect of the trial being concluded in the near future, violative of his rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Satender , with respect to prevailing . Jails in India are flooded with undertrial prisoners. The statistics placed before us would indicate that more than 2/3rd of the inmates of the prisons constitute undertrial prisoners. Of this category of prisoners, majority may not even be required to e arrested despite registration of a cognizable offence, being charged with offences punishable for seven years or less. They are not only poor and illiterate but also would include women. Thus, there is a culture of offence being inherited by many of . As observed by this Court, it certainly exhibits the mindset, a vestige of colonial India, on the part of the investigating agency, notwithstanding the fact arrest is a draconian measure resulting in curtailment of liberty, and thus In a democracy, there can never be an impression that it is a police State as both are conceptually In cases where the recovery only marginally breaches the threshold for commercial quantity of the alleged contraband, this Court has found it proper to grant regular bail. Reference in this regard can be made to CHETAN THAKUR 2025.09.26 19:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CWP-31737 the judgments rendered by this Court in State of Punjab in CRM Singh vs. State of Punjab in CRM Ranjti Singh @ Ranjit Kumar vs. State of Punjab in CRM decided on 10.01.2023, Jagt 21460-2022 decided on 08.02.2023, Harjeet Singh alias Sonu vs. State of Punjab in CRM State of Punjab in CRM Singh @ Mang 04.04.2022, Pardeep Singh vs. State of Punjab, CRM decided on 19.01.2023, Hari Yadav @ Haiya vs. State of Punjab (CRM 37645-2021)’ decided on 11.11.2022, ‘Shankar Prashad Chanau vs. The State of Punjab, CRM Kumar vs. State of Punjab, CRM Salim vs. State of Haryana, CRM Satnam Singh @ Chacha vs State of Punjab, CRM decided on 25.02.2021, Gagandeep vs. State of Punjab, CRM 2021, decided on 27.01.2021, Gurpreet Singh @ Gopi vs. State of Punjab, CRM-M41039 Punjab, CRM State of Punjab, CRM 8. without commenting upon the merits of the case lest it may prejudice the outcome of the trial, the petitioner 4 31737-2025 the judgments rendered by this Court in State of Punjab in CRM-M-64821-2023 decided on 25.01.2024, Gurmeet Singh vs. State of Punjab in CRM-M-1007 Ranjti Singh @ Ranjit Kumar vs. State of Punjab in CRM decided on 10.01.2023, Jagtar Singh vs. State of Punjab in CRM 2022 decided on 08.02.2023, Harjeet Singh alias Sonu vs. State of Punjab in CRM-M-8242-2023 decided on 15.01.2024, Jang Kanwar vs. State of Punjab in CRM-M-53415-2021 decided on 19.01.2022, Sukhchain Singh @ Manga vs. State of Punjab, CRM 04.04.2022, Pardeep Singh vs. State of Punjab, CRM decided on 19.01.2023, Hari Yadav @ Haiya vs. State of Punjab (CRM 2021)’ decided on 11.11.2022, ‘Shankar Prashad Chanau vs. The of Punjab, CRM-M-24090-2020, decided on 27.08.2020, Gurpreet Kumar vs. State of Punjab, CRM-M-17021 Salim vs. State of Haryana, CRM-M-42436 Satnam Singh @ Chacha vs State of Punjab, CRM decided on 25.02.2021, Gagandeep vs. State of Punjab, CRM 2021, decided on 27.01.2021, Gurpreet Singh @ Gopi vs. State of Punjab, M41039-2019, decided on 26.02.2020, Dalbara Singh vs. State of Punjab, CRM-M-47880-2022 decided on 16.01.2023’, State of Punjab, CRM-M-13791-2022 decided on 15.02.2023 In view the above, the present petition is allowed. Thus, without commenting upon the merits of the case lest it may prejudice the outcome of the trial, the petitioner-Aakash the judgments rendered by this Court in Davinder Singh alias Baba vs. 2023 decided on 25.01.2024, Gurmeet 1007-2024 decided on 15.01.2024, Ranjti Singh @ Ranjit Kumar vs. State of Punjab in CRM-M-57185-2022 ar Singh vs. State of Punjab in CRM-M 2022 decided on 08.02.2023, Harjeet Singh alias Sonu vs. State of 2023 decided on 15.01.2024, Jang Kanwar vs. 2021 decided on 19.01.2022, Sukhchain a vs. State of Punjab, CRM-M-7857-2022 decided on 04.04.2022, Pardeep Singh vs. State of Punjab, CRM-M-46244-2022 decided on 19.01.2023, Hari Yadav @ Haiya vs. State of Punjab (CRM-M 2021)’ decided on 11.11.2022, ‘Shankar Prashad Chanau vs. The 2020, decided on 27.08.2020, Gurpreet 17021-2021, decided on 31.08.2021, 42436-2020, decided on 24.02.2021, Satnam Singh @ Chacha vs State of Punjab, CRM-M-34531-2020, decided on 25.02.2021, Gagandeep vs. State of Punjab, CRM-M-3055 2021, decided on 27.01.2021, Gurpreet Singh @ Gopi vs. State of Punjab, 2019, decided on 26.02.2020, Dalbara Singh vs. State of 2022 decided on 16.01.2023’, and Vivek Watts vs. 2022 decided on 15.02.2023. In view the above, the present petition is allowed. Thus, without commenting upon the merits of the case lest it may prejudice the Aakash is ordered to be released on nder Singh alias Baba vs. 2023 decided on 25.01.2024, Gurmeet 2024 decided on 15.01.2024, 2022 M- 2022 decided on 08.02.2023, Harjeet Singh alias Sonu vs. State of 2023 decided on 15.01.2024, Jang Kanwar vs. 2021 decided on 19.01.2022, Sukhchain 2022 decided on 2022 M- 2021)’ decided on 11.11.2022, ‘Shankar Prashad Chanau vs. The 2020, decided on 27.08.2020, Gurpreet 2021, decided on 31.08.2021, 2020, decided on 24.02.2021, 0, 3055- 2021, decided on 27.01.2021, Gurpreet Singh @ Gopi vs. State of Punjab, 2019, decided on 26.02.2020, Dalbara Singh vs. State of and Vivek Watts vs. In view the above, the present petition is allowed. Thus, without commenting upon the merits of the case lest it may prejudice the is ordered to be released on CHETAN THAKUR 2025.09.26 19:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CWP-31737 regular bail during trial on his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of 9. of opinion of this Court on meri proceed without being prejudiced by observations of this Court. September P.C 5 31737-2025 regular bail during trial on his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Illaqa/Duty Magistrate/Trial Court. Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed as expression of opinion of this Court on merits of the case and the trial Court shall proceed without being prejudiced by observations of this Court. 26, 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned. : Whether Reportable. : regular bail during trial on his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the Magistrate/Trial Court. Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed as expression ts of the case and the trial Court shall proceed without being prejudiced by observations of this Court. (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned. : Yes/No Yes/No regular bail during trial on his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed as expression ts of the case and the trial Court shall (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) CHETAN THAKUR 2025.09.26 19:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.