CRM-M-37429-2025 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 231 CRM-M-37429-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 19.09.2025 Amritpal Singh @ Bavra ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present:- Mr. Raj Kumar Chandna, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab. MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral) 1. The instant one is the second petition that has been filed by the petitioner under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No. 66 dated 06.06.2023, registered under Section 22 (c) of the NDPS Act, 1985 at Police Station Nihal Singh Wala, District Moga. The first petition, bearing number CRM-M-19417-2024, was dismissed as withdrawn on 02.04.2025. 2. As per the allegations, on 06.06.2023, the petitioner was apprehended on the basis of suspicion and 95 loose intoxicating tablets containing Etizolam, weighing 14.53 grams, were recovered from him. Since he could not produce any valid license or permit to keep in his possession the recovered drugs, he was formally arrested at the spot. The contraband was taken into possession by the police. Investigation now stands completed and the petitioner is facing trial for commission of aforementioned offence. MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.09.21 16:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-37429-2025 (O&M) -2- 3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case. He is in custody since 06.06.2023. Conclusion of trial is likely to take time. His further incarceration would not serve any useful purpose. It is, therefore, urged that the petition deserves to be allowed and the petitioner deserves to be released on bail. 4. Custody certificate of the petitioner has been filed by the respondent-State. Learned State counsel has argued that the trial has concluded as all the prosecution witnesses stand examined and the case is at the stage of producing defence evidence. Hence, it is urged that the petition does not deserve to be allowed. 5. This Court has heard the submissions made by both the sides. 6. The fact that trial is at the stage of producing defence evidence has not been controverted by learned counsel for the petitioner. The trial has almost concluded. The allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature as commercial quantity of contraband was recovered from him. In view of these facts, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner does not deserve to be released on bail. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. 7. It is made clear that the observations made hereinabove are only for the purpose of deciding the present petition and the same shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 19.09.2025 (MANISHA BATRA) Waseem Ansari JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.09.21 16:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document