sufficiently long time to conclude served by keeping the petitioner in custody any longer. 5. Per contra long time to conclude and, therefore, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody any longer. Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the …..Petitioner will take a and, therefore, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody any longer. , learned State counsel has opposed the prayer for bail Petitioner will take a and, therefore, no useful purpose would be prayer for bail REKHA SHARMA 2026.07.07 06:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh while stating that the petitioner is involved in two other cases under the NDPS Act. 6. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 7. The petitioner is in custody since 24.04.2025. An intermediate quantity of heroin is alleged to have been recovered from him. Strangely enough, despite final report having been submitted on 18.10.2025; charges have not been framed till today. It is, therefore, evident that trial will take a sufficiently long time to conclude and, therefore, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody any longer. 8. In view of the aforementioned facts and circumstances, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned. Rekha REKHA SHARMA 2026.07.07 06:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh