CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----33587 33587 33587 33587---- 222 222 222 222 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Shama State of Punjab CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: Present: Present: Present: Present:- SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) the petitioner in case bearing FIR No offences punishable under Section Psychotropic Substances NDPS Act added later on) 2. an accused of being involved in an FIR pertaining to alleged recovery of 255 grams of intoxicant powder (Tramadol Hydrochloride) from the petitioner. 3. in custody since mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act have not been complied with, and thus, ----2025 2025 2025 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Date of decision: Date of decision: Date of decision: Date of decision: versus Punjab HON’BLE HON’BLE HON’BLE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Mr. Suneel Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Jaypreet Singh, DAG Punjab. ***** ***** ***** ***** SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL) , J. (ORAL) , J. (ORAL) , J. (ORAL) Present petition has been filed under Section Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.43 dated ences punishable under Sections 21/ 22/ 61/ 85 Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’) NDPS Act added later on), at Police Station Kotwali, Patiala, Punjab. The gravamen of the allegations against the petitioner is that he is an accused of being involved in an FIR pertaining to alleged recovery of 255 grams of intoxicant powder (Tramadol Hydrochloride) from the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has in custody since 01.03.2025. Learned counsel has further submitted that the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act have not been complied with, and thus, 1111 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----33587 33587 33587 33587----2025 2025 2025 2025 Date of decision: Date of decision: Date of decision: Date of decision: September 17 September 17 September 17 September 17, 2025 , 2025 , 2025 , 2025 ….Petitioner ….Respondent MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL for the petitioner. Mr. Jaypreet Singh, DAG Punjab. Present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to dated 01.03.2025, registered for the s 21/ 22/ 61/ 85 of the Narcotic Drugs and (for short ‘NDPS Act’) (Section 29 of the Kotwali, Patiala, Punjab. The gravamen of the allegations against the petitioner is that he is an accused of being involved in an FIR pertaining to NDPS Act involving alleged recovery of 255 grams of intoxicant powder (Tramadol Hydrochloride) el for the petitioner has iterated that the petitioner is Learned counsel has further submitted that the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act have not been complied with, and thus, 1111 2025 2025 2025 2025 , 2025 , 2025 , 2025 , 2025 Petitioner ….Respondent the Bharatiya for grant of regular bail to registered for the Narcotic Drugs and of the The gravamen of the allegations against the petitioner is that he is NDPS Act involving alleged recovery of 255 grams of intoxicant powder (Tramadol Hydrochloride) that the petitioner is Learned counsel has further submitted that the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act have not been complied with, and thus, MAHAVIR SINGH 2025.09.17 17:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment 2222 CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----33587 33587 33587 33587----2025 2025 2025 2025 the prosecution case suffers from inherent defects. Learned counsel has argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question. Learned counsel has iterated that the contraband alleged to have been recovered from the petitioner is 255 grams of Tramadol Hydrochloride, which is marginally above the threshold limit of non-commercial quantity specified in the notification issued under the NDPS Act. Thus, regular bail is prayed for. 4. Learned State counsel has opposed the present petition by arguing that the allegations raised against the petitioner are serious in nature and, thus, she does not deserve the concession of the regular bail. Learned State counsel has further submitted that the instant bail plea is barred by the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, and thus, the same ought to be dismissed. Learned State counsel seeks to place on record custody certificate dated 16.09.2025 in Court, which is taken on record. 5. I have heard counsel for the rival parties and have gone through the available records of the case. 6. The petitioner was arrested on 01.03.2025 whereinafter investigation was carried out and challan was presented on 28.08.2025. Total 23 prosecution witnesses have been cited, but none has been examined till date. It is thus, indubitable that conclusion of the trial will take long. It is not in dispute that the contraband allegedly recovered from the petitioner is 255 grams of Tramadol Hydrochloride, which is marginally above the threshold limit of non-commercial quantity. Reliance in this regard can be placed upon the orders passed by this Court in Rajdev Giri versus State of Punjab, Rajdev Giri versus State of Punjab, Rajdev Giri versus State of Punjab, Rajdev Giri versus State of Punjab, CRM-M- 44898-2019, decided on 18.09.2020; Rahish versus State of Haryana, Rahish versus State of Haryana, Rahish versus State of Haryana, Rahish versus State of Haryana, CRM-M- 36498-2020, decided on 11.11.2020; Kara Kara Kara Karambir versus State of Haryana, mbir versus State of Haryana, mbir versus State of Haryana, mbir versus State of Haryana, CRM- M-31820-2019, decided on 28.08.2019: Jagjit Singh @ Jagga Gill versus State Jagjit Singh @ Jagga Gill versus State Jagjit Singh @ Jagga Gill versus State Jagjit Singh @ Jagga Gill versus State MAHAVIR SINGH 2025.09.17 17:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment 3333 CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----33587 33587 33587 33587----2025 2025 2025 2025 of Punjab, of Punjab, of Punjab, of Punjab, CRM-M-41242-2019, decided on 27.02.2020 and Baljit Kaur @ Baljit Kaur @ Baljit Kaur @ Baljit Kaur @ Baljito versus State of Punjab, Baljito versus State of Punjab, Baljito versus State of Punjab, Baljito versus State of Punjab, CRM-M-12849-2020, decided on 04.06.2020, wherein accused were enlarged on bail in cases where the alleged recovery was slightly more than the quantity prescribed for commercial category under the NDPS Act. The rival contentions raised at Bar give rise to debatable issues, which shall be ratiocinated upon during the course of trial. This Court does not deem it appropriate to delve deep into these rival contentions, at this stage, lest it may prejudice the trial. Nothing tangible has been brought forward to indicate the likelihood of the petitioner absconding from the process of justice or interfering with the prosecution evidence. 6.1. As per custody certificate dated 16.09.2025 filed by the learned State counsel, the petitioner has already suffered incarceration for a period of 06 months and 13 days, & is not shown to be involved in any other case. In this view of the matter, the rigor imposed under Section 37 of the NDPS Act stands diluted in light of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Suffice to say, further detention of the petitioner as an undertrial is not warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case. 7. In view of above, the present petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on her furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Ld. concerned trial Court/Duty Magistrate. However, in addition to conditions that may be imposed by the concerned trial Court/Duty Magistrate, the petitioner shall remain bound by the following conditions: (i) The petitioner shall not mis-use the liberty granted. (ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with any evidence, oral or documentary, during the trial. (iii) The petitioner shall not absent herself on any date before the trial. (iv) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail. MAHAVIR SINGH 2025.09.17 17:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment 4444 CRM CRM CRM CRM----M M M M----33587 33587 33587 33587----2025 2025 2025 2025 (v) The petitioner shall deposit her passport, if any, with the trial Court. (vi) The petitioner shall give her cellphone number to the Investigating Officer/SHO of concerned Police Station and shall not change her cell-phone number without prior permission of the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate. (vii) The petitioner shall not in any manner try to delay the trial. (viii) The petitioner shall submit, on the first working day of every month, an affidavit, before the concerned trial Court, to the effect that she has not been involved in commission of any offence after being released on bail. In case the petitioner is found to be involved in any offence after her being enlarged on bail in the present FIR, on the basis of her affidavit or otherwise, the State is mandated to move, forthwith, for cancellation of her bail which plea, but of course, shall be ratiocinated upon merits thereof. 8. In case of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions and those which may be imposed by concerned trial Court/Duty Magistrate as directed hereinabove or upon showing any other sufficient cause, the State/complainant shall be at liberty to move cancellation of bail of the petitioner. 9. Ordered accordingly. 10. Nothing said hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 11. Since the main case has been decided, pending miscellaneous application, if any, shall also stands disposed off. ((((SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL)))) JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE September 17 September 17 September 17 September 17, 2025 , 2025 , 2025 , 2025 mahavir Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No MAHAVIR SINGH 2025.09.17 17:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment