Judgment · High Court · 2026

Mr. Joginder Pal Ratra, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Joginder Pal Ratra, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Jaypreet Singh, DAG Punjab. Mr. Jaypreet Singh, DAG Punjab. ***** SUMEET GOEL, J. (Oral) SUMEET GOEL

#1. Present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya a, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to a, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to Nagarik Suraksha Sanhit the petitioner, in case bearing FIR No.008 the petitioner, in case bearing FIR No. , registered for the dated 06.01.2026, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 21-C and 25 offences punishable under Section of the Narcotic Drugs and C and 25 of the Narcotic Drugs and and Section 25(8) Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’) and Section 25(8) Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘N Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘N Lopoke, District Amritsar Rural. of Arms Act, at Police Station Lopoke, District Amritsar Rural. of Arms Act

#2. he is an The gravamen of allegations against the petitioner is that she is an The gravamen of allegations against the petitioner is that /Arms Act accused of being involved in an FIR pertaining to NDPS Act/Arms Act accused of being involved in an FIR pertaining to NDPS Act accused of being involved in an FIR pertaining to NDPS Act involving involving alleged alleged

4.863 kilograms of heroin recovery of 4.863 kilograms of heroin 4.863 kilograms of heroin recovery of weapons/cartridges . The petitioner is stated to be nominated /cartridges in large quantity. The petitioner is stated to be nominated . The petitioner is stated to be nominated accused Abhiraj Singh as an accused on the basis of disclosure statement of co-accused Abhiraj Singh as an accused on the basis of disclosure statement of co as an accused on the basis of disclosure statement of co and Nandini. and Nandini.

#3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the petitioner for the petitioner has iterated that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question and has no direct or has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question and has no direct or has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question and has no direct or has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question and has no direct or indirect connection with the alleged recovery. Learned counsel has further indirect connection with the alleged recovery. Learned counsel has further indirect connection with the alleged recovery. Learned counsel has further indirect connection with the alleged recovery. Learned counsel has further CRM-M- -19310-2026 2 iterated that the petitioner was not named in the initi iterated that the petitioner was n named in the initial FIR and even . According accusation made against the petitioner are vague and unspecific. According accusation made against the petitioner are vague and unspecific accusation made against the petitioner are vague and unspecific to learned counsel, no recovery whatsoever of any contraband to learned counsel, no recovery whatsoever of any contraband to learned counsel, no recovery whatsoever of any contraband arms/cartridges /cartridges has been effected from the of the has been effected from the conscious possession of the petitioner nor from the personal search, house, vehicle petitioner nor from the or at the instance of rsonal search, house, vehicle nor at the instance of the petitioner, which completely demolishe the petitioner the case of the prosecution. which completely demolishes the case of the prosecution Learned counsel has further submitted that mandatory provisions of the NDPS Learned counsel has further submitted that mandatory provisions of the NDPS Learned counsel has further submitted that mandatory provisions of the NDPS Learned counsel has further submitted that mandatory provisions of the NDPS , the prosecution case Act have not scrupulously been complied with, and thus, the prosecution case Act have not scrupulously been complied with, and thus Act have not scrupulously been complied with, and thus suffers from inherent defects. Learned counsel suffers from inherent defects. that the Learned counsel has further contended that the entire case against the petitioner rests solely on the disclosure statement of entire case against the petitioner rests solely on the disclosure statement of entire case against the petitioner rests solely on the disclosure statement of entire case against the petitioner rests solely on the disclosure statement of the co-accused , which is inadmissible in evidence accused while in police custody, which is inadmissible in evidence , which is inadmissible in evidence and cannot form the basis of d cannot form the basis of her continued incarceration. Furthermore, the continued incarceration. Furthermore, the It has entire case of the prosecution is based on conjectures and surmises. It has entire case of the prosecution is based on conjectures and surmises. entire case of the prosecution is based on conjectures and surmises. been further contended that there is no independent corroborative material been further contended that there is no independent corroborative material been further contended that there is no independent corroborative material been further contended that there is no independent corroborative material petitioner to substantiate the prosecution on record at the instance of the petitioner to substantiate the prosecution petitioner to substantiate the prosecution on record at the instance of the mandatory provisions of Sections 42 and 50 of allegations. Furthermore, the mandatory provisions of Sections 42 and 50 of mandatory provisions of Sections 42 and 50 of allegations. Furthermore, the the NDPS Act have not been complied with in letter and spirit. Learned the NDPS Act have not been complied with in letter and spirit. the NDPS Act have not been complied with in letter and spirit. Learned thereof cannot be counsel has iterated that the trial is delayed and the liability thereof cannot be counsel has iterated that the trial is delayed and the liability counsel has iterated that the trial is delayed and the liability fastened upon the petitioner. It has been further iterated that the fastened upon the petitioner. It has been further iterated that the petitioner petitioner is has already undergone a substantial period in custody since 08.01.2026 and has already undergone a substantial period has already undergone a substantial period in custody since 08.01.2026 and of custody. According to learned counsel, of custody the trial is likely to take a According to learned counsel, the trial is likely to take a considerable time to conclude as out of 28 prosecution witnesses cited, none able time to conclude as out of 28 prosecution witnesses cited, none as out of 28 prosecution witnesses cited, none petitioner is not required for any further has been examined. Moreover, the petitioner is not required for any further petitioner is not required for any further has been examined investigation and that there is no likelihood of tampering with evidence or investigation and that there is no likelihood of tampering with evidence or investigation and that there is no likelihood of tampering with evidence or investigation and that there is no likelihood of tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses if she is granted the concession of regular bail. influencing witnesses if granted the concession of regular bail. On the On the , the grant of regular bail is entreated for. strength of these submissions, the grant of regular bail is entreated for. strength of these submission CRM-M- -19310-2026 3

#4. , learned State counsel has opposed the present petition Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the present petition , learned State counsel has opposed the present petition are serious in nature by arguing that the allegations raised against the petitioner are serious in nature by arguing that the allegations raised against the petitioner by arguing that the allegations raised against the petitioner and, thus, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of regular bail. and, thus, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of regular bail. and, thus, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of regular bail. and, thus, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of regular bail. petition in hand does not Learned State counsel has further submitted that the petition in hand does not Learned State counsel has further submitted that Learned State counsel has further submitted that meet the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act and is, thus, liable to be rejected meet the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act and is, thus, liable to be rejecte meet the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act and is, thus, liable to be rejecte meet the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act and is, thus, liable to be rejecte Furthermore, the absence of recovery from the petitioner on this score alone. Furthermore, the absence of recovery from the petitioner Furthermore, the absence of recovery from the petitioner on this score alone. does not dilute her culpability particularly when the role attributed to her is does not dilute her culpability particularly when the role attributed to her is does not dilute her culpability particularly when the role attributed to her is does not dilute her culpability particularly when the role attributed to her is of supply and facilitation. According to learned counsel, the implication of of supply and facilitation. According to learned counsel, the implication of of supply and facilitation. According to learned counsel, the implication of of supply and facilitation. According to learned counsel, the implication of ot based merely on the disclosure statement of the co- the petitioner is not based merely on the disclosure statement of the co ot based merely on the disclosure statement of the co the petitioner is n accused but is duly supported by recovery effected during the course of accused but is duly supported by recovery effected during the course of accused but is duly supported by recovery effected during the course of accused but is duly supported by recovery effected during the course of investigation and other incriminating material collected by the investigating investigation and other incriminating material collected by the investigating investigation and other incriminating material collected by the investigating investigation and other incriminating material collected by the investigating agency. In case, the petitioner is released on bail , there is all likelihood that In case, the petitioner is released on bail, there is all likelihood that In case, the petitioner is released on bail he may abscond from the process of justice and also interfere with the she may abscond from the process of justice and also interfere with the he may abscond from the process of justice and also interfere with the he may abscond from the process of justice and also interfere with the Accordingly, the dismissal of the petition in prosecution witnesses/ evidence. Accordingly, the dismissal of the petition in Accordingly, the dismissal of the petition in prosecution witnesses/ evidence. hand is prayed for. hand is prayed for.

#5. rused the paper- I have heard counsel for the rival parties and perused the paper I have heard counsel for the rival parties and pe book as also the record produced before me. book as also the record produced before me. book as also the record produced before me.

#6. Indubitably, serious allegations have been levelled against the Indubitably, serious allegations have been levelled against the Indubitably, serious allegations have been levelled against the petitioner. As per the prosecution, heavy quantity of heroin i.e. 4.863 Kgs petitioner. As per the prosecution, heavy quantity of heroin i.e. 4.863 Kgs petitioner. As per the prosecution, heavy quantity of heroin i.e. 4.863 Kgs petitioner. As per the prosecution, heavy quantity of heroin i.e. 4.863 Kgs e are specific and weapons/cartridges have been recovered and there are specific and weapons/cartridges have been recovered and ther and weapons/cartridges have been recovered and ther allegations against the petitioner. In the considered opinion of this Court, the allegations against the petitioner In the considered opinion of this Court, the In the considered opinion of this Court, the allegations as also recovery of the contraband, disentitle the petitioner to the allegations as also recovery of the contraband, disentitle the petitioner to the allegations as also recovery of the contraband, disentitle the petitioner to the allegations as also recovery of the contraband, disentitle the petitioner to the discretionary relief of regular bail. Furthermore, no accentuating or exceptional discretionary relief of regular bail. Furthermore, no accentuating or exception discretionary relief of regular bail. Furthermore, no accentuating or exception discretionary relief of regular bail. Furthermore, no accentuating or exception constitute a circumstances have been made out which may prima facie constitute a circumstances have been made out which may circumstances have been made out which may compelling ground for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, especially in light compelling ground for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, especially in light compelling ground for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, especially in light compelling ground for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, especially in light . The of the recovery of commercial quantity of the contraband and weapons. The of the recovery of commercial quantity of the contraband of the recovery of commercial quantity of the contraband CRM-M- -19310-2026 4 Court cannot accept the plea of the false implication Court cannot accept the plea merely of the false implication of the petitioner merely based on bald assertions unsupported by any cogent material. The argument of based on bald assertions unsupported by any cogent material. The argument of based on bald assertions unsupported by any cogent material. The argument of based on bald assertions unsupported by any cogent material. The argument of the learned counsel that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR the learned counsel that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR the learned counsel that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR the learned counsel that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR as the surrounding circumstances in question, cannot be accepted, at this stage, as the surrounding circumstances in question, cannot be accepted, at this stage, in question, cannot be accepted, at this stage, of the incident raise doubts that can only be clarified during the course of trial. of the incident raise doubts that can only be clarified during the course of trial. of the incident raise doubts that can only be clarified during the course of trial. of the incident raise doubts that can only be clarified during the course of trial.

#7. whereinafter The petitioner was arrested on 08.01.2026 whereinafter The petitioner was arrested on investigation was carried out and challan qua investigation was carried out and challan the petitioner was presented on qua the petitioner was presented on cited prosecution witnesses, none has been 04.07.2026. Out of total 28 cited prosecution witnesses, none has been cited prosecution witnesses, none has been 04.07.2026 examined till date. From the rival submissions as also the material brought examined till date. From the rival submissions as also the material brought examined till date. From the rival submissions as also the material brought examined till date. From the rival submissions as also the material brought plausible cause is made out in favour of forth before this Court, no cause nay plausible cause is made out in favour of plausible cause is made out in favour of forth before the petitioner to meet with the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act the petitioner to meet with th which is e rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act which is mandatory in nature. Reference in this regard can be made to the judgment(s) mandatory in nature. Reference in this regard can be made to the judgment(s) mandatory in nature. Reference in this regard can be made to the judgment(s) mandatory in nature. Reference in this regard can be made to the judgment(s) Union of India versus Namdeo passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court titled as Union of India versus Namdeo passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court titled as passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court titled as Union of Ashruba Nakade, Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.9792/2025; Union of Ashruba Nakade, Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.9792/ Ashruba Nakade, Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.9792/ India versus Vigin K. Varghese, Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No(s).7768 of India versus Vigin K. Varghese, Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No(s).7768 of India versus Vigin K. Varghese, Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No(s).7768 of India versus Vigin K. Varghese, Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No(s).7768 of State of Punjab versus Sukhwinder Singh @ Gora, Special Leave to 2025 and State of Punjab versus Sukhwinder Singh @ Gora, Special Leave to State of Punjab versus Sukhwinder Singh @ Gora, Special Leave to State of Punjab versus Sukhwinder Singh @ Gora, Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.5020/2026. Appeal (Crl.) No.5020/2026

7.1. . The Furthermore, the petitioner is in custody since 08.01.2026. The Furthermore, the petitioner is in custody since the quantity of period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner vis.-a-vis., the quantity of period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner recovered, is not sufficient to grant the concession of contraband/firearm(s) recovered, is not sufficient to grant the concession of recovered, is not sufficient to grant the concession of contraband regular bail as well. A profitable reference in this regard can be made to the regular bail as well. A profitable reference in this regard can be made to the regular bail as well. A profitable reference in this regard can be made to the regular bail as well. A profitable reference in this regard can be made to the State of Punjab vs. udgment(s) of the Hon’ble Supreme Court titled as State of Punjab vs. judgment(s) of the Hon’ble Supreme Court titled as udgment(s) of the Hon’ble Supreme Court titled as State of Punjab vs. Balraj Sukhwinder Singh @ Gora = 2026 INSC 411 and State of Punjab vs. Balraj Sukhwinder Singh @ Gora = 2026 INSC 411 Sukhwinder Singh @ Gora = 2026 INSC 411 Singh @ Billa = 2026 INSC 618. Singh @ Billa = 2026 INSC 618.

#8. of the Hence, keeping in view the entirety of the factual milieu of the Hence, keeping in view the entirety of the factual especially the contraband alleged to be recovered being case in hand; especially the contraband alleged to be recovered being especially the contraband alleged to be recovered being case in hand; abscond from the commercial in nature, likelihood of the petitioner going to abscond from the commercial in nature, likelihood of the petitioner going commercial in nature, likelihood of the petitioner going CRM-M- -19310-2026 5 process of justice & also interfere with the prosecution witnesses/ evidence; the process of justice & also interfere with the prosecution witnesses/ evidence; the process of justice & also interfere with the prosecution witnesses/ evidence; the process of justice & also interfere with the prosecution witnesses/ evidence; the petition in hand deserves to be dismissed. petition in hand deserves to be

#10. Ordered accordingly. Nothing said hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of Nothing said hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of Nothing said hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. opinion on the merits of the case.

#11. Since the main case has been decided, pending miscellaneous Since the main case has been decided, pending miscellaneous Since the main case has been decided, pending miscellaneous , if any, shall also stand disposed off. application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off. application (SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE July 22, 202 Ajay 2026 Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable: Yes/No Yes/No