IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 213 CRM-M-48892-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 08.09.2025 Vishan Ram @ Vishana Ram ...Petitioner(s) VERSUS State of Punjab ...Respondent(s) CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ Present :- Mr. L.S. Sekhon, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Mr. Mohit Kapoor, Sr. DAG Punjab. ***** VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral) 1. The instant second petition has been filed under Section 483 of The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR bearing No.139 dated 11.07.2023, registered under Section 18-C the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 at Police Station Sadar Ludhiana, District Ludhiana. 2. Custody certificate dated 05.09.2025 qua the petitioner has been filed by the learned State counsel today in the Court and the same is taken on record. Copy thereof has been furnished to the learned counsel for the petitioner. 3. Briefly summarised, the case of the prosecution is that a police party had set up a checkpoint on the right side of the link road leading towards Ludhiana. During the course of such naka-bandi, two persons were allegedly noticed sitting with a backpack of black and red colour. On seeing the police party, they appeared perplexed and attempted to move towards the adjoining fields. On account of such suspicious conduct, they were MANGAL SINGH 2025.09.10 18:45 I am the author of this document 2 213 CRM-M-48892-2025 (O&M) apprehended and, upon inquiry, disclosed their names as Vishana Ram, son of Dhokal Ram, and Mahinder Kumar, son of Bijaram. Upon search of the said backpack, a recovery of 3 kilograms of opium was effected. 4. Counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has undergone the actual custody of 02 years, 01 month and 21 days and he does not suffer from any criminal antecedents. He contends that only 04 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far and the trial is likely to take a long time to conclude. 5. Learned State Counsel, on the other hand, submits that a total of 13 witnesses were cited by the prosecution. Out of these, 4 witnesses have already been examined, while 6 have been given up. Accordingly, only 3 prosecution witnesses now remain to be examined. It is submitted that now the trial is fixed for 22.09.2025 for recording the prosecution evidence. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that only 03 prosecution witnesses have remained to be examined and bearing in mind that the case is now fixed before the trial Court for 22.09.2025 for recording of the evidence, I do not find it a fit ground for grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner, at this stage. 7. Trial Court is however directed to take appropriate steps to conclude the trial expeditiously pending against the petitioner. 8. The present petition is accordingly dismissed. (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) 08.09.2025 JUDGE Mangal Singh Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No MANGAL SINGH 2025.09.10 18:45 I am the author of this document