IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 211 CRM-M-41796-2025 Date of decision: 08.08.2025 Harpreet Singh @ Peeta ....Petitioner V/s State of Punjab ....Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. L.S. Sekhon, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Jasjit Singh, DAG, Punjab. ***** SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL) 1. Present petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS 2023 for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.225 dated 03.06.2025, registered for the offences punishable under Section 21 of NDPS Act at Police Station City Barnala, District Barnala. 2. The gravamen of the FIR in question is that the petitioner is an accused of being involved in an FIR pertaining to NDPS Act involving 14 grams heroin. 3. Learned for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is in custody since 03.06.2025. Learned counsel has iterated that the recovery NAVEEN NAGPAL 2025.08.08 16:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment HIgh Court Chandigarh CRM-M-41796-2025 P a g e | 2 from the petitioner is 14 grams heroin, which is non-commercial in nature, and thus, rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act would not apply. Learned counsel has further iterated that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question. He has further argued that the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act have not been complied with, and thus, the prosecution case suffers from inherent defects. 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, he does not deserve the concession of the regular bail. Learned State counsel seeks to place on record custody certificate dated 31.07.2025 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 03.06.2025. The completion of investigation and the trial emanating therefrom, if occasion so arises, will take time. At this juncture, it is not in dispute that the recovery alleged from the petitioner is only 14 grams of heroin, which is non-commercial in nature. The rival contentions raised at Bar give rise to debatable issues 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. NAVEEN NAGPAL 2025.08.08 16:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment HIgh Court Chandigarh CRM-M-41796-2025 P a g e | 3 6.1. As per custody certificate dated 07.08.2025 filed by the learned State counsel, the petitioner has already suffered incarceration for a period of more than 16 months. Further, as per the said custody certificate the petitioner is stated to be involved in 05 cases. However, this factum cannot be a ground sufficient by itself, to decline the concession of regular bail to the petitioner in the FIR in question when a case is made out for grant of regular bail qua the FIR in question by ratiocinating upon the facts/circumstances of the said FIR. Reliance in this regard can be placed upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi v. State of U.P. and another, 2012 (1) RCR (Criminal) 586; a Division Bench judgment of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in case of Sridhar Das v. State, 1998 (2) RCR (Criminal) 477 & judgments of this Court in CRM-M No.38822-2022 titled as Akhilesh Singh v. State of Haryana, decided on 29.11.2021, and Balraj v. State of Haryana, 1998 (3) RCR (Criminal) 191. Suffice to say, the further detention of the petitioner in custody is not required in the facts and circumstances of the case. 7. In view of the above, the petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate. However, in addition to conditions that may be imposed by the concerned CJM/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. NAVEEN NAGPAL 2025.08.08 16:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment HIgh Court Chandigarh CRM-M-41796-2025 P a g e | 4 (iii) The petitioner shall not absent himself on any date before the trial. (iv) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail. (v) The petitioner shall deposit his passport, if any, with the trial Court. (vi) The petitioner shall give his cell phone number to the Investigating Officer/SHO of concerned Police Station and shall not change his 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 CJM/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. NAVEEN NAGPAL 2025.08.08 16:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment HIgh Court Chandigarh CRM-M-41796-2025 P a g e | 5 11. Since the main case has been decided, pending miscellaneous application, if any, shall also stands disposed off. (SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE August 08, 2025 Naveen Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No NAVEEN NAGPAL 2025.08.08 16:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment HIgh Court Chandigarh