IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 221 CRM-M-35339-2026 Date of Decision: 09.07.2026 Onkar Sehgal …Petitioner V/s State of Punjab …Respondent CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL Present: Ms. Divya Menon, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Rahul Jindal, AAG, Punjab. *** VIKRAM AGGARWAL, J (ORAL) Prayer in the present petition preferred under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short the “BNSS”) is for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.11 dated 28.01.2023, registered under Sections 22 and 29 (added later on while framing charges) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short the “NDPS Act”) at Police Station Garshankar, District Hoshiarpur. 2. Custody certificate dated 08.07.2026 filed by learned State counsel in Court today is taken on record. 3. On 28.01.2023, a police party apprehended two persons namely Bahadur Singh and Onkar Sehgal @ Laddi (petitioner). Upon their search, Bahadur Singh was found to be in possession of 130 grams of Alprazolam whereas, the petitioner was found to be in possession of 110 grams of Alprazolam. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated. It has been argued that the case of the prosecution, in the first instance, is not believable as the police party was allegedly travelling in a private vehicle and upon seeing them, the accused are stated to have got VIKAS CHANDER 2026.07.10 12.56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-35339-2026 -2- perplexed and tried to turn back. She submits that since the police party was in a private vehicle, there would have been no occasion for the accused to have got perplexed and to have turned back. She further submits that there is gross violation of the statutory provisions as envisaged under Section 50 of the NDPS Act for, the search was conducted by the investigating officer himself by recording consent of the accused for such search. She further submits that it is a clear cut case of false implication and the contraband had been planted. She further submits that the petitioner is in custody for the last 1 year, 5 months and 14 days; final report has been submitted; charges have been framed as far as back on 09.05.2025 but till today out of 9 prosecution witnesses, only 1 witness has been examined whereas 2 witnesses have been given up. She further submits that the investigating officer of the case is not appearing for his statement despite repeatedly having been summoned and even bailable warrants having been issued. She lastly submits that the petitioner has clean antecedents and is not involved in any other case. 5. Per contra, learned counsel representing the State has opposed the bail petition stating that a commercial quantity of Alprazolam was recovered from the petitioner and co-accused Bahadur Singh. 6. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner deserves to be granted bail. 7. This Court does not wish to venture into the merits of the case lest it may amount to an observation on the same. However, the arguments raised by learned counsel for the petitioner are indeed worthy of acceptance, at least for the purpose of grant of bail. The petitioner is in custody since the date of his arrest i.e. 28.01.2023. 1 year, 5 months and 14 days have gone by. VIKAS CHANDER 2026.07.10 12.56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-35339-2026 -3- Despite final report having been submitted and charges having been framed as far back as on 09.05.2025, only 1 witness has been examined. Learned State counsel has not been able to deny that the investigating officer of the case has not yet been examined. This Court also takes note of the fact that the investigating officer is not appearing despite bailable warrants having been issued. 8. Keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances, this Court finds it to be a fit case for the grant of regular bail. 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 concerned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate. (VIKRAM AGGARWAL) JUDGE July 09, 2026 vcgarg Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No VIKAS CHANDER 2026.07.10 12.56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document