CRM-M-32671-2026 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 233 CRM-M-32671-2026 Date of decision : 06.07.2026 AARIF ... PETITIONER Versus STATE OF HARYANA .. RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present:- Mr. Afjal Hussain, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Vijay Kumar, AAG, Haryana. *** H.S. Grewal, J.(Oral) 1. The petitioner has filed second petition under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 439 Cr.P.C.) seeking grant of regular bail in case FIR No.140 dated 09.05.2024, registered under Sections 20-B(ii)C, 29, 61 and 85 of the NDPS Act, at Police Station Mundkati, District Palwal. 2. The case of the prosecution is that on 09.05.2024, a secret information was received that co-accused Nepal, Udayveer and Ranjeet were indulging in smuggling of ganja from Odisha and were transporting the same in a Santro car bearing registration No.HR-29-AA-9657. Acting upon the said information, a naka was laid and the said vehicle was intercepted. On seeing the police party, the occupants of the car tried to flee, however, they were apprehended. Upon search of the vehicle, a plastic bag containing 30.5 kgs of ganja was recovered from a hidden compartment beneath the CNG cylinder installed in the car. During the course of investigation, co-accused Nepal SONIA GUGNANI 2026.07.07 13.23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-32671-2026 -2- suffered a disclosure statement implicating the present petitioner-Aarif to the effect that the recovered contraband was being transported for the petitioner and the alleged consignment belonged to him. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and he was neither named in the FIR nor any recovery has been effected from him. He submits that the name of the petitioner surfaced only on the basis of disclosure statement of co-accused Nepal and besides the aforesaid disclosure statement, there is no independent material to connect the petitioner with the alleged offence. It is also submitted that the petitioner is in custody for the last more than 01 year, 01 month and 05 days. He, therefore, prays for release of the petitioner on regular bail as only 05 out of 22 cited prosecution witnesses have been examined so far. 4. Notice of motion. 5. On the asking of the Court, Mr. Vijay Kumar, AAG, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent and vehemently opposes the prayer for grant of regular bail to the petitioner. He has filed the custody certificate of the petitioner in Court, which is taken on record. As per the custody certificate, the petitioner is in custody for the last more than 01 year, 01 month and 05 days. He submits that the payment to the seller was made by the present petitioner-Aarif, as the alleged consignment of contraband belonged to him. The petitioner is also involved in three more cases under the NDPS Act. He, upon instructions, submits that only 05 out of 22 cited prosecution witnesses have been examined so far. 6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. SONIA GUGNANI 2026.07.07 13.23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-32671-2026 -3- 7. It is apparent that the recovery effected in the present case is of 30.5 kgs of ganja, which falls within the ambit of commercial quantity under the NDPS Act. Although the petitioner was not apprehended at the spot, however, during investigation, his role has surfaced to the effect that the alleged consignment of contraband belonged to him and the payment towards the same was made by him to the seller. Moreover, as per the custody certificate placed on record, the petitioner is involved in three other cases under the NDPS Act, which reflects his antecedents. 8. Keeping in view the nature and gravity of allegations, the quantity of contraband involved and the criminal antecedents of the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner at this stage. 9. Consequently, the present petition is dismissed. 10. However, the petitioner shall be at liberty to move a fresh application for bail in case the trial does not make substantial progress. (H.S.GREWAL) July 06, 2026 JUDGE Sonia Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No SONIA GUGNANI 2026.07.07 13.23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh