CRM-M-2464-2026 219 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Baljit Singh @ Gulli State of Punjab CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Present: Mr. Raghav Soni, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Rajesh Bhardwaj, J. (ORAL) 1. Present first petition has been filed praying for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.41, dated 24.03.2025, under Section 21(C), 25, 29, 61 and 85 of NDPS Act and Section 341(2) and 317(2) registered at Police Station 2. Succinctly, the facts of the case are that secret information, SI Gopal Singh apprehended petitioner Baljit Singh and co accused Arjinderpal Singh while riding a motor driving the motor namely Arjinderpal Singh (co apprehended and the bag 515 grams heroin regarding the conscious possession of the same, thus, the FIR was registered and they were arrested on the spot. On registration of the FIR, the investigation commenced. The samples taken we 2026 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -.- CRM Date of Decision : Baljit Singh @ Gulli VERSUS CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ Mr. Raghav Soni, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Jasjit Singh, DAG Punjab. -.- Rajesh Bhardwaj, J. (ORAL) Present first petition has been filed praying for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.41, dated 24.03.2025, under Section 21(C), 25, 29, 61 and 85 of NDPS Act and Section 341(2) and 317(2) registered at Police Station Lopoke, Amritsar Rural Succinctly, the facts of the case are that secret information, SI Gopal Singh apprehended petitioner Baljit Singh and co accused Arjinderpal Singh while riding a motor driving the motor-cycle. When they were given signal to stop, the pillion rider, namely Arjinderpal Singh (co-accused) tried to throw a plastic bag apprehended and on suspicion the search of the same was conducted grams heroin was recovered. They failed to produce any licence regarding the conscious possession of the same, thus, the FIR was registered and arrested on the spot. On registration of the FIR, the investigation commenced. The samples taken were sent to the FSL. On completion of the -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-2464-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision : 06.05.2026 ....Petitioner ....Respondent RAJESH BHARDWAJ Mr. Raghav Soni, Advocate for the petitioner. Present first petition has been filed praying for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.41, dated 24.03.2025, under Section 21(C), 25, 29, 61 and 85 of NDPS Act and Section 341(2) and 317(2) of BNS, Lopoke, Amritsar Rural. Succinctly, the facts of the case are that on 24.03.2025, on the basis of secret information, SI Gopal Singh apprehended petitioner Baljit Singh and co accused Arjinderpal Singh while riding a motor-cycle. Petitioner Baljit Singh was cycle. When they were given signal to stop, the pillion rider, accused) tried to throw a plastic bag. Both were search of the same was conducted. On search of They failed to produce any licence regarding the conscious possession of the same, thus, the FIR was registered and arrested on the spot. On registration of the FIR, the investigation re sent to the FSL. On completion of the Present first petition has been filed praying for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.41, dated 24.03.2025, under Section BNS, on 24.03.2025, on the basis of secret information, SI Gopal Singh apprehended petitioner Baljit Singh and co- ngh was cycle. When they were given signal to stop, the pillion rider, . Both were . On search of They failed to produce any licence regarding the conscious possession of the same, thus, the FIR was registered and arrested on the spot. On registration of the FIR, the investigation re sent to the FSL. On completion of the TRIPTI SAINI 2026.05.08 17:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-2464-2026 investigation, the challan was presented and on framing of charges, the trial commenced. The petitioner approached the Court of learned Judge, Special Court, Amritsar praying for the grant of regular bail. However, sides and finding no merit in the same, the learned Judge, Special Court, Amritsar declined the bail application filed by the petitioner vide order dated Hence being aggrieved, the petitioner is before this Court praying regular bail by way of filing the present petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has submitted that case of the prosecution is b violation of Section 42 NDPS Act. He submits that made from the pillion rider and not from the conscious possession of the present petitioner, therefore, there is a blatant violation of mandatory provisions of Section 50 of NDPS Act. He further submits that the petitioner is not involved in any o case of similar nature and the petitioner is behind bars from the year. He has submitted that in the facts and circumstances, the petitioner deserves to be granted regular bail. 4. Per contra submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. He has submitted that there was a specific further contended that from the search of the co recovered, which is a commercial quantity of NDPS Act are attracted. He has produced custody certificate of the petitioner today in the Court, which is taken on record. 5. Heard. 6. On hearing learned cou 2026 (O&M) investigation, the challan was presented and on framing of charges, the trial The petitioner approached the Court of learned Judge, Special Court, Amritsar praying for the grant of regular bail. However, sides and finding no merit in the same, the learned Judge, Special Court, Amritsar declined the bail application filed by the petitioner vide order dated Hence being aggrieved, the petitioner is before this Court praying regular bail by way of filing the present petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has submitted that case of the prosecution is based upon the secret information violation of Section 42 NDPS Act. He submits that made from the pillion rider and not from the conscious possession of the present petitioner, therefore, there is a blatant violation of mandatory provisions of Section 50 of NDPS Act. He further submits that the petitioner is not involved in any o case of similar nature and the petitioner is behind bars from the He has submitted that in the facts and circumstances, the petitioner deserves to be granted regular bail. Per contra, learned counsel for the State has vehe submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. He has submitted that there was a specific secret information about the petitioner and the co further contended that from the search of the co recovered, which is a commercial quantity, and, thus, the provisions of Section 37 of NDPS Act are attracted. He has produced custody certificate of the petitioner today in the Court, which is taken on record. Heard. On hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it -2- investigation, the challan was presented and on framing of charges, the trial The petitioner approached the Court of learned Judge, Special Court, Amritsar praying for the grant of regular bail. However, after hearing both the sides and finding no merit in the same, the learned Judge, Special Court, Amritsar declined the bail application filed by the petitioner vide order dated 15.11.2025 Hence being aggrieved, the petitioner is before this Court praying for the grant of regular bail by way of filing the present petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has submitted that admittedly the ased upon the secret information, however, there is a violation of Section 42 NDPS Act. He submits that the alleged recovery has been made from the pillion rider and not from the conscious possession of the present petitioner, therefore, there is a blatant violation of mandatory provisions of Section 50 of NDPS Act. He further submits that the petitioner is not involved in any other case of similar nature and the petitioner is behind bars from the last more than one He has submitted that in the facts and circumstances, the petitioner deserves , learned counsel for the State has vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. He has submitted that about the petitioner and the co-accused. It is further contended that from the search of the co-accused 515 grams of heroin was , and, thus, the provisions of Section 37 of NDPS Act are attracted. He has produced custody certificate of the petitioner nsel for the parties and perusing the record, it investigation, the challan was presented and on framing of charges, the trial The petitioner approached the Court of learned Judge, Special Court, after hearing both the sides and finding no merit in the same, the learned Judge, Special Court, Amritsar 15.11.2025. for the grant of Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has admittedly the , however, there is a has been made from the pillion rider and not from the conscious possession of the present petitioner, therefore, there is a blatant violation of mandatory provisions of Section ther more than one He has submitted that in the facts and circumstances, the petitioner deserves mently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. He has submitted that accused. It is was , and, thus, the provisions of Section 37 of NDPS Act are attracted. He has produced custody certificate of the petitioner nsel for the parties and perusing the record, it TRIPTI SAINI 2026.05.08 17:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-2464-2026 is deciphered that Violation of Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act has been contended. petitioner in the present case was arrested on the recovery of 515 quantity above 250 grams of heroin is of commercial in nature, whereas in the present case recovery attributed is produced would show that the petitioner has suffered an incarceration of 01 year, 01 month and 07 7. As held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), 2023 LiveLaw(SC)260 the case of the petitioner is covered by the ratio of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In the abovesaid case Hon'ble Supreme Court expressed its views as under:- 19. A plain and literal interpretation of the conditions under 37 (i.e., that Court should be satisfied that the accused is not guilty and would not commit any offence) would effectively exclude grant of bail altogether, resulting in punitive detention and unsanctioned preventive detention as well. Therefore, special conditions as enacted under within constitutional parameters is where the court is reasonably satisfied on a prima facie look at the material on record (whenever the bail application is ma interpretation, would result in complete denial of the bail to a person accused of offences such as those enacted under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. 20. xxxxx 21. stringent conditions for grant of bail, may be necessary in public interest; yet, if trials are not concluded in time, the injustice wrecked on the individual is immeasurable. 2026 (O&M) is deciphered that the case of the prosecution is based on the secret information Violation of Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act has been contended. petitioner in the present case was arrested on the 515 grams of heroin has been effected from the public place. The quantity above 250 grams of heroin is of commercial in nature, whereas in the present case recovery attributed is 515 grams of heroin. Custody cert produced would show that the petitioner has suffered an incarceration of 01 year, 07 days as on 05.05.2026. As held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), 2023 LiveLaw(SC)260 the case of the petitioner is covered by the ratio of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In the abovesaid case Hon'ble Supreme Court expressed its views 19. A plain and literal interpretation of the conditions under 37 (i.e., that Court should be satisfied that the accused is not guilty and would not commit any offence) would effectively exclude grant of bail altogether, resulting in punitive detention and unsanctioned preventive detention as well. Therefore, special conditions as enacted under within constitutional parameters is where the court is reasonably satisfied on a prima facie look at the material on record (whenever the bail application is made) that the accused is not guilty. Any other interpretation, would result in complete denial of the bail to a person accused of offences such as those enacted under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. 20. xxxxx .....it would be important to reflect that laws stringent conditions for grant of bail, may be necessary in public interest; yet, if trials are not concluded in time, the injustice wrecked on the individual is immeasurable. -3- the case of the prosecution is based on the secret information Violation of Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act has been contended. T petitioner in the present case was arrested on the spot on 24.03.2025. The alleged grams of heroin has been effected from the public place. The quantity above 250 grams of heroin is of commercial in nature, whereas in the grams of heroin. Custody certificate produced would show that the petitioner has suffered an incarceration of 01 year, As held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mohd Muslim @ Hussain Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), 2023 LiveLaw(SC)260, this Court is of the opinion that the case of the petitioner is covered by the ratio of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In the abovesaid case Hon'ble Supreme Court expressed its views 19. A plain and literal interpretation of the conditions under Section 37 (i.e., that Court should be satisfied that the accused is not guilty and would not commit any offence) would effectively exclude grant of bail altogether, resulting in punitive detention and unsanctioned preventive detention as well. Therefore, the only manner in which such special conditions as enacted under Section 37 can be considered within constitutional parameters is where the court is reasonably satisfied on a prima facie look at the material on record (whenever the de) that the accused is not guilty. Any other interpretation, would result in complete denial of the bail to a person accused of offences such as those enacted under Section 37 of the .....it would be important to reflect that laws which impose stringent conditions for grant of bail, may be necessary in public interest; yet, if trials are not concluded in time, the injustice wrecked the case of the prosecution is based on the secret information. The . The alleged grams of heroin has been effected from the public place. The quantity above 250 grams of heroin is of commercial in nature, whereas in the ificate produced would show that the petitioner has suffered an incarceration of 01 year, Mohd Muslim @ Hussain of the opinion that the case of the petitioner is covered by the ratio of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In the abovesaid case Hon'ble Supreme Court expressed its views Section 37 (i.e., that Court should be satisfied that the accused is not guilty and would not commit any offence) would effectively exclude grant of bail altogether, resulting in punitive detention and unsanctioned the only manner in which such can be considered within constitutional parameters is where the court is reasonably satisfied on a prima facie look at the material on record (whenever the de) that the accused is not guilty. Any other interpretation, would result in complete denial of the bail to a person accused of offences such as those enacted under Section 37 of the which impose stringent conditions for grant of bail, may be necessary in public interest; yet, if trials are not concluded in time, the injustice wrecked TRIPTI SAINI 2026.05.08 17:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-2464-2026 22. xxxxx 23. There is a further danger of the prisoner turning to crime not only turns admirable, but the more professional the crime, more honour is paid to the criminal” ‘The Prison Community’ published in 1940 further deleterious effects economic strata: immediate loss of livelihood, and in several cases, scattering of families as well as loss of family bonds and alienation from society. The courts therefore, have to be sensitive to these aspects (because in the ev irreparable), and ensure that trials laws enact stringent provisions, are taken up and concluded speedily.” 8. The veracity of the allegations would be assessed only afte conclusion of the trial and on the appreciation of evidence to be led by both the parties before the trial Court. 9. This Court would refrain itself from commenting anything on the merits of the case. perusing the record, the Court is of the opinion that learned petitioner succeeds in making out a case for the grant of 10. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail of the concerned trial Court/Duty Magistrate. furnish the bail bonds within seven days from today, then his further custody period after one week will not be counte 11. Nothing said herein shall be treated as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. May 06, 2025 tripti Whether speaking/non Whether reportable 2026 (O&M) 22. xxxxx 23. There is a further danger of the prisoner turning to crime not only turns admirable, but the more professional the crime, more honour is paid to the criminal” ‘The Prison Community’ published in 1940 further deleterious effects - where the accuse economic strata: immediate loss of livelihood, and in several cases, scattering of families as well as loss of family bonds and alienation from society. The courts therefore, have to be sensitive to these aspects (because in the event of an acquittal, the loss to the accused is irreparable), and ensure that trials – laws enact stringent provisions, are taken up and concluded speedily.” The veracity of the allegations would be assessed only afte conclusion of the trial and on the appreciation of evidence to be led by both the parties before the trial Court. This Court would refrain itself from commenting anything on the merits of the case. Keeping in view the arguments raised by both the perusing the record, the Court is of the opinion that learned petitioner succeeds in making out a case for the grant of Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is to be released on bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the of the concerned trial Court/Duty Magistrate. However, if the petitioner does not furnish the bail bonds within seven days from today, then his further custody period after one week will not be counted in this case. Nothing said herein shall be treated as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. Whether speaking/non-speaking : Speaking Whether reportable : Yes/No -4- 23. There is a further danger of the prisoner turning to crime, “as crime not only turns admirable, but the more professional the crime, more honour is paid to the criminal”22 (also see Donald Clemmer’s ‘The Prison Community’ published in 194023). Incarceration has where the accused belongs to the weakest economic strata: immediate loss of livelihood, and in several cases, scattering of families as well as loss of family bonds and alienation from society. The courts therefore, have to be sensitive to these aspects ent of an acquittal, the loss to the accused is – especially in cases, where special laws enact stringent provisions, are taken up and concluded speedily.” The veracity of the allegations would be assessed only after the conclusion of the trial and on the appreciation of evidence to be led by both the This Court would refrain itself from commenting anything on the Keeping in view the arguments raised by both the sides and perusing the record, the Court is of the opinion that learned counsel for the petitioner succeeds in making out a case for the grant of bail. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction However, if the petitioner does not furnish the bail bonds within seven days from today, then his further custody d in this case. Nothing said herein shall be treated as an expression of opinion on the (RAJESH BHARDWAJ) JUDGE speaking : Speaking : Yes/No crime, “as crime not only turns admirable, but the more professional the crime, (also see Donald Clemmer’s ). Incarceration has d belongs to the weakest economic strata: immediate loss of livelihood, and in several cases, scattering of families as well as loss of family bonds and alienation from society. The courts therefore, have to be sensitive to these aspects ent of an acquittal, the loss to the accused is especially in cases, where special laws enact stringent provisions, are taken up and concluded speedily.” r the conclusion of the trial and on the appreciation of evidence to be led by both the This Court would refrain itself from commenting anything on the sides and counsel for the Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is satisfaction However, if the petitioner does not furnish the bail bonds within seven days from today, then his further custody Nothing said herein shall be treated as an expression of opinion on the (RAJESH BHARDWAJ) TRIPTI SAINI 2026.05.08 17:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document