Judgment · High Court · 2026

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL CORAM: Present: Mr. Kartik Gandhi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Kartik Gandhi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Hemant Aggarwal, DAG Punjab. Mr. Hemant Aggarwal, 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 aksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to aksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to Nagarik Sur the petitioner, in case bearing FIR No.149 the petitioner, in case bearing FIR No. , registered for the dated 02.08.2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 15 and 25 offences punishable under Section of the Narcotic Drugs and 15 and 25 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’) (Section 29 of the Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’) (Section 29 of the Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’) (Section 29 of the Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’) (Section 29 of the Sadar Jagraon, District Ludhiana. NDPS Act added later on), at Police Station Sadar Jagraon, District Ludhiana. NDPS Act added later on), at Police Station NDPS Act added later on), at Police Station

#2. The gravamen of allegations against the petitioner is that he is an The gravamen of allegations against the petitioner is that he is an The gravamen of allegations against the petitioner is that he is an cused of being involved in an FIR pertaining to NDPS Act involving alleged accused of being involved in an FIR pertaining to NDPS Act involving alleged cused of being involved in an FIR pertaining to NDPS Act involving alleged cused of being involved in an FIR pertaining to NDPS Act involving alleged recovery of 280 kgs of poppy husk. recovery of 2

#3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the petitioner Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the petitioner Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the petitioner . Learned counsel has further submitted that . Learned counsel has further submitted th is in custody since 02.08.2025. Learned counsel has further submitted th is in custody since mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act have not scrupulously been complied mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act have not scrupulously been complied mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act have not scrupulously been complied mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act have not scrupulously been complied with, and thus, the prosecution case suffers from inherent defects. Learned with, and thus, the prosecution case suffers from inherent defects. Learned with, and thus, the prosecution case suffers from inherent defects. Learned with, and thus, the prosecution case suffers from inherent defects. Learned 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 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 thereof cannot be CRM-M- -32769-2026 2 itioner. Learned counsel has also argued that upon fastened upon the petitioner. Learned counsel has also argued that upon itioner. Learned counsel has also argued that upon fastened upon the pet culmination of investigation, challan stands presented, and out of total 16 culmination of investigation, challan stands presented, and out of total culmination of investigation, challan stands presented, and out of total culmination of investigation, challan stands presented, and out of total prosecution witnesses, none has been examined till date. Learned counsel has prosecution witnesses, none has been examined till date. Learned counsel has prosecution witnesses, none has been examined till date. Learned counsel has prosecution witnesses, none has been examined till date. Learned counsel has Learned counsel has iterated that nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner. Learned counsel has iterated that nothing is to be recovered from the pe iterated that nothing is to be recovered from the pe urged that the petitioner was merely a cleaner on the truck in question and urged that the petitioner was merely a cleaner on the truck in question and urged that the petitioner was merely a cleaner on the truck in question and urged that the petitioner was merely a cleaner on the truck in question and possession of the contraband recovered. It cannot be said to be in conscious possession of the contraband recovered. It possession of the contraband recovered. It cannot be said to be in has been further contended that the co- has been further contended that the co the petitioner namely -accused of the petitioner namely Hardeep Singh, has been granted the concession of anticipatory bail vide order Hardeep Singh, has been granted the concession of anticipatory bail vide order Hardeep Singh, has been granted the concession of anticipatory bail vide order Hardeep Singh, has been granted the concession of anticipatory bail vide order dated 13.01.2026 passed in CRM-M-54093 dated 13.01.2026 passed in CRM Learned counsel has further 54093-2025. Learned counsel has further approximately 01 year. iterated that the petitioner has suffered incarceration for approximately 01 year. iterated that the petitioner has suffered incarceration for iterated that the petitioner has suffered incarceration for ese submission, the grant of regular bail is entreated for. On the strength of these submission, the grant of regular bail is entreated for. ese submission, the grant of regular bail is entreated for. On the strength of th

#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 by arguing that the allegations raised against the petitioner 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 are serious in nature by arguing that the allegations raised against the petitioner are serious in nature 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. Learned State counsel has further submitted that Learned State counsel has further submit petition in hand does not ted that the petition in hand does not 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 rejected 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 rejected on this score alone. In case, the petitioner is released on bail, there is all on this score alone. In case, the petitioner is released on bail, there is all on this score alone. In case, the petitioner is released on bail, there is all on this score alone. In case, the petitioner is released on bail, there is all ce and also interfere likelihood that he may abscond from the process of justice and also interfere likelihood that he may abscond from the process of justi likelihood that he may abscond from the process of justi Accordingly, the dismissal of the with the prosecution witnesses/ evidence. Accordingly, the dismissal of the with the prosecution witnesses/ evidence. with the prosecution witnesses/ evidence. petition in hand is prayed for. petition in hand is prayed for.

#5. I have heard counsel for the rival parties and perused the paper- I have heard counsel for the rival parties and perused the paper I have heard counsel for the rival parties and perused the paper 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. considered opinion of this Court, the allegations as also In the considered opinion of this Court, the allegations as also considered opinion of this Court, the allegations as also recovery of the contraband, disentitle the petitioner to the discretionary relief recovery of the contraband, disentitle the petitioner to the discretionary relief recovery of the contraband, disentitle the petitioner to the discretionary relief recovery of the contraband, disentitle the petitioner to the discretionary relief of regular bail. Furthermore, no accentuating or exceptional circumstances of regular bail. Furthermore, no accentuating or exceptional circumstances of regular bail. Furthermore, no accentuating or exceptional circumstances of regular bail. Furthermore, no accentuating or exceptional circumstances have been made out which may prima facie have been made out which may constitute a compelling ground for prima facie constitute a compelling ground for CRM-M- -32769-2026 3 grant of regular bail to the petitioner, especially in light of the recovery of grant of regular bail to the petitioner, especially in light of the recovery of grant of regular bail to the petitioner, especially in light of the recovery of grant of regular bail to the petitioner, especially in light of the recovery of commercial quantity of the contraband. The Court cannot accept the plea of the commercial quantity of the contraband. The Court cannot accept the plea of the commercial quantity of the contraband. The Court cannot accept the plea of the commercial quantity of the contraband. The Court cannot accept the plea of the false implication of the petitioner merely based on bald asser false implication tions unsupported merely based on bald assertions unsupported by any cogent material. The argument of the learned counsel that the petitioner by any cogent material. The argument of the learned counsel that the petitioner by any cogent material. The argument of the learned counsel that the petitioner by any cogent material. The argument of the learned counsel that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question, cannot be accepted, at this has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question, cannot be accepted, at this has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question, cannot be accepted, at this has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question, cannot be accepted, at this stage, as the surrounding circumstances of the incident raise doubts that can stage, as the surrounding circumstances of the incident raise doubts that ca stage, as the surrounding circumstances of the incident raise doubts that ca stage, as the surrounding circumstances of the incident raise doubts that ca only be clarified during the course of trial. only be clarified during the course of trial.

#7. whereinafter The petitioner was arrested on 02.08.2025 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 6 cited prosecution witnesses, none has been 27.01.2026. Out of total 16 cited prosecution witnesses, none has been 6 cited prosecution witnesses, none has been 27.01.2026 examined till date. Indubitably, the petitioner is involved in the FIR in question examined till date. Indubitably, the petitioner is involved in the FIR in question examined till date. Indubitably, the petitioner is involved in the FIR in question examined till date. Indubitably, the petitioner is involved in the FIR in question pertaining to commercial quantity of 280 Kgs pertaining to commercial quantity of 2 as per NDPS Act, 80 Kgs of poppy husk as per NDPS Act, 1985. From the rival submissions as also the material brought forth before this 1985. From the rival submissions as also the material brought forth before 1985. From the rival submissions as also the material brought forth before Court, no cause plausible cause is made out in favour of the petitioner to , no cause nay plausible cause is made out in favour of the petitioner to plausible cause is made out in favour of the petitioner to which is mandatory in meet with the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act which is mandatory in meet with the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act meet with the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act passed by the nature. Reference in this regard can be made to the judgment(s) passed by the nature. Reference in this regard can be made to the judgment nature. Reference in this regard can be made to the judgment Hon’ble Supreme Court titled as Union of Hon’ble Supreme Court title India versus Namdeo Ashruba Union of India versus Namdeo Ashruba Union of India versus Nakade, Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.9792/2025; Union of India versus Nakade, Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.9792/2025 Nakade, Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.9792/2025 Vigin K. Varghese, Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No(s).7768 of 2025 and Vigin K. Varghese, Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No(s).7768 of 2025 Vigin K. Varghese, Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No(s).7768 of 2025 State of Punjab versus Sukhwinder Singh @ Gora, Special Leave to Appeal State of Punjab versus Sukhwinder Singh @ Gora, Special Leave to Appeal State of Punjab versus Sukhwinder Singh @ Gora, Special Leave to Appeal State of Punjab versus Sukhwinder Singh @ Gora, Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.5020/2026 .5020/2026.

7.1. . The Furthermore, the petitioner is in custody since 02.08.2025. The Furthermore, the petitioner is in custody since 02.08.2025 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 contraband recovered, is not sufficient to grant the concession of regular bail as contraband recovered, is not sufficient to grant the concession of regular bail as contraband recovered, is not sufficient to grant the concession of regular bail as contraband recovered, is not sufficient to grant the concession of regular bail as profitable reference in this regard can be made to the judgment(s) of well. A profitable reference in this regard can be made to the judgment(s) of profitable reference in this regard can be made to the judgment(s) of profitable reference in this regard can be made to the judgment(s) of State of Punjab vs. Sukhwinder Singh @ the Hon’ble Supreme Court titled as State of Punjab vs. Sukhwinder Singh @ State of Punjab vs. Sukhwinder Singh @ the Hon’ble Supreme Court titled as CRM-M- -32769-2026 4 State of Punjab vs. Balraj Singh @ Billa = 2026 Gora = 2026 INSC 411 and State of Punjab vs. Balraj Singh @ Billa = 2026 State of Punjab vs. Balraj Singh @ Billa = 2026 Gora = 2026 INSC 411 INSC 618. INSC 618.

#8. Further, though co-accused, namely, has been used, namely, Hardeep Singh has been extended the concession of anticipatory bail by extended the concession of the Coordinate Bench of this bail by the Coordinate Bench of this appears to have been extended such concession Court, but the said co-accused appears to have been extended such concession appears to have been extended such concession Court, but the said co sis of as he was implicated into the FIR in question primarily on the basis of as he was implicated into the FIR in question primarily on the ba as he was implicated into the FIR in question primarily on the ba accused whereas the petitioner was apprehended disclosure statement of co-accused whereas the petitioner was apprehended accused whereas the petitioner was apprehended disclosure statement of co from the vehicle in question from which the contraband in question was from the vehicle in question from which the contraband in question was from the vehicle in question from which the contraband in question was from the vehicle in question from which the contraband in question was effected.

#9. of the Hence, keeping in view the entirety of the factual milieu of the Hence, keeping in view the entirety of the factual y the contraband alleged to be recovered being case in hand; especially the contraband alleged to be recovered being y the contraband alleged to be recovered being case in hand; especiall 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 also interfere with the prosecution witnesses/ evidence and process of justice & also interfere with the prosecution witnesses/ evidence and also interfere with the prosecution witnesses/ evidence and process of justice & antecedents of the petitioner, which reflect other FIR(s) against him; the antecedents of the petitioner, which reflect other FIR(s) against him; the antecedents of the petitioner, which reflect other FIR(s) against him; the antecedents of the petitioner, which reflect other FIR(s) against him; the petition in hand deserves to be dismissed. petition in hand deserves to be

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

#12. 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 application, if any, shall also stands disposed off. application, if any, shall also stands disposed off. application, if any, shall also stands disposed off. (SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE July 15, 202 Ajay 2026 Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable: Yes/No Yes/No