CRM-M No.33031 of 2026 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 251 ***** CRM-M No.33031 of 2026 Date of decision : 6.7.2026 Date of uploading : 6.7.2026 Ramesh Chander @ Ramu ………….Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …….Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. J.S. Sandhu, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. Anup Singh, AAG, Punjab --- SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL) 1. Present second petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.161 dated 2.12.2025 under Sections 15 and 29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, registered at Police Station Chhajli, District Sangrur. 2. The FIR in question pertains to recovery of 40 Kgs. of poppy husk, a contraband which is non-commercial in nature, from the petitioner on 2.12.2025 in the area of village Mauran, 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that the petitioner is in custody since 2.12.2025. Learned counsel has further argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question. Learned counsel has further argued that the contraband, i.e.40 Kgs. of poppy husk, ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.07.06 17:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.33031 of 2026 -2- recovered from the petitioner, falls under the category of non-commercial quantity. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner is a man aged 26 years with clean antecedents. Thus, regular bail is prayed for. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the present petition by arguing that the allegations raised are serious in nature and thus the petitioner does not deserve the concession of regular bail. Learned State counsel seeks to place on record custody certificate dated 4.7.2026 in Court, which is taken on record. 5. I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the available records of the case. 6. The petitioner was arrested on 2.12.2025 wherein after investigation was carried out; challan was prepared on 23.1.2026 and subsequently filed. Total 23 prosecution witnesses have been cited but none have been examined till date as the charges are yet to be framed. It is not in dispute that the contraband allegedly recovered from the petitioner is 40 Kgs. of poppy husk, which is non-commercial in nature. Hence, rigors of Section 37 of NDPS Act would not apply. The rival contentions raised by learned counsel give rise to debatable issues which 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. ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.07.06 17:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.33031 of 2026 -3- 6.1 As per custody certificate dated 4.7.2026 filed by learned State counsel, the petitioner has already suffered incarceration for a period of 6 months and 26 days & is not shown to be involved in any other case. 6.2 Indubitably, the present petition is the 2nd attempt by the petitioner to secure regular bail. The first one was dismissed on 24.3.2026 on merits thereof. However, keeping in view the entirety of the factual milieu of the case in hand, especially extended incarceration of the petitioner and pace of the trial, which reflects that even charges have yet not been framed, this Court is inclined to favourably consider the instant plea for bail. A profitable reference, in this regard, can be made to a judgment of this Court passed in CRA-S-2332-2023 titled as Rafiq Khan versus State of Haryana and another; relevant whereof reads as under: “10. As an epilogue to the above discussion, the following principles emerge: I. Second/successive regular bail petition(s) filed is maintainable in law & hence such petition ought not to be rejected solely on the ground of maintainability thereof. II. Such second/successive regular bail petition(s) is maintainable whether earlier petition was dismissed as withdrawn/dismissed as not pressed/dismissed for non- prosecution or earlier petition was dismissed on merits. III. For the second/successive regular bail petition(s) to succeed, the petitioner/applicant shall be essentially/pertinently required to show substantial change in circumstances and showing of a mere superficial or ostensible change would not suffice. The metaphoric expression of seeking second/successive bail plea(s) ought not be abstracted into literal iterations of petition(s) without substantial, effective and consequential change in circumstances. IV. No exhaustive guidelines can possibly be laid down as to what would constitute substantial change in circumstances as every case has its own unique facts/circumstance. Making such an attempt is nothing but an utopian endeavour. Ergo, this issue is best left to the judicial wisdom and discretion of the Court dealing with such second/successive regular bail petition(s). V. In case a Court chooses to grant second/successive regular bail petition(s), cogent and lucid reasons are pertinently required to be recorded for granting such plea despite such a plea being second/successive petition(s). In other words, the ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.07.06 17:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.33031 of 2026 -4- cause for a Court having successfully countenanced/entertained such second/successive petition(s) ought to be readily and clearly decipherable from the said order passed.” Suffice to say, further detention of the petitioner as an undertrial is not warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case. 7. In view of above, the present petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Ld. 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. (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 he 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 his being enlarged on bail in the present FIR, on the basis of his affidavit or otherwise, the State is mandated to move, forthwith, for cancellation of his 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 ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.07.06 17:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.33031 of 2026 -5- 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. (SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE 6.7.2026 Ashwanii Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.07.06 17:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document