Gurpreet Singh vs State Of Punjab

YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR, J. (Oral)

Prayer in the third petition under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case having FIR No.116 dated 20.11.2024 registered under Sections 21(c) and 29 of NDPS Act, 1985 (added later on 61 and 85 of NDPS) at Police Station Sadar Jalalabad, District Fazilka.

Upon notice, the State counsel has appeared and has opposed the bail. Both the parties have been heard and material placed on the file has been perused.

As per allegations in the FIR, petitioner and co-accused Manjeet Singh were apprehended by the police party on 20.11.2024 while the police party was on patrolling duty. On search, 500 grams of heroin was recovered from co-accused namely Manjeet Singh. On interrogation, petitioner disclosed that he has concealed some heroin near a canal and in pursuance thereof, he got recovered 235 grams of heroin, which was also taken into possession. After completion of investigation, final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was presented.

Learned counsel for petitioner contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated. He is in custody since 20.11.2024. Co-accused namely Manjeet Singh from whom 500 grams of heroin was recovered has been released on bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 28.01.2026 in CRM-M-3354-2026 and petitioner too is thus entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity. Learned counsel next contended that out of total 14 witnesses cited by the prosecution, not a single witness has been examined till date. The trial is likely to take a long time to conclude and no useful purpose will be served by detaining him in custody anymore and he may be released on bail. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon judgments passed in CRM-M-21794 of 2023 – Sandeep Singh v. State of Punjab decided on 05.05.2023, CRR-1785 of 2018 (O&M)- Vicky Kaur v. State of Punjab, decided on 13.08.2018, CRM-M-14029 of 2018 Kamlesh v. State of Punjab, decided on 06.05.2015, CRM-M-17321 of 2025 Jassu Ram @ Jasuram v. State of Punjab, decided on 04.04.2025 and a judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. (s).12788/2023 – Nandalal Mondal @ Abhay Mondal v. The State of West Bengal, judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court passed in Criminal Appeal No.4883/2025 - Santosh Pawar Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Anr. decided on 14.11.2025 and (2022) 10 SCC 52, Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation decided on 11.07.2022.

On the other hand, learned State Counsel has opposed the bail and argued that the petitioner has committed a heinous crime as he was found involved in the recovery of commercial quantity of heroin and in view of rigors contained in statutory provision of Section 37 of NDPS Act, he is not entitled to the benefit of bail.

As per prosecution case, petitioner was found involved in the recovery of 235 grams of heroin whereas 500 grams of heroin was recovered from his co-accused Manjeet Singh. He is in custody since 20.11.2024 and as such, trial has been delayed and there is no likelihood of the same being concluded soon. Hon’ble Supreme Court in 2023 Live Law (SC) 533, Rabi Prakash v. State of Odisha has held that prolonged incarceration, generally militates against the most precious fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution and in such a situation, the conditional liberty must override the statutory embargo created under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. To the same effect is the law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in 2024 (4) RCR (Criminal) 172, Ankur Chaudhary v. State of Madhya Pradesh 2023 AIR(SC) 1648, Mohammad Muslim alias Hussain v. State (NCT of Delhi) in which Hon’ble Supreme Court while granting regular bail to an accused, from whom commercial quantity of contraband was recovered, has held that grant of bail on the ground of undue delay in trial cannot be said to be fettered by Section 37 of the NDPS Act. A co-ordinate Bench of this Court has also held so in judgment reported as Law Finder Doc Id #2770222 Garpawandeep Singh alias Bihari v. State of Punjab decided vide judgment dated 27.08.2025 passed in CRM-M-19408 of 2025 wherein 260 grams of heroin was allegedly recovered. Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No.12788/2023 titled Nandalal Mondal alias Abhay Mondal v. The State of West Bengal, vide judgment dated 03.01.2024 while taking into consideration the period of custody already undergone by the petitioner/under- trial, the fact that he does not have any criminal antecedents and also keeping in view the prolonged incarceration, ordered release of the petitioner on bail who was found in possession of 10,000 ml of codeine phosphate - a cough syrup which falls within the commercial quantity. Hon’ble Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal No.4883/2025 titled Santosh Pawar Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Anr. (Supra), has held that appellant who was being prosecuted for being in possession of commercial quantity of narcotic substance was entitled for bail in view of her incarceration for a period of 19 months. In Satender Kumar Antil’s case (supra), prolonged incarceration and inordinate delay engaged the attention of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, which considered the correct approach towards bail, with respect to several enactments, including Section 37 of NDPS Act. The Court expressed the opinion that Section 436A of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (which requires inter alia the accused to be enlarged on bail if the trial is not concluded within specified periods) would apply.

Therefore, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the present case and also the ratio of law laid down in afore-mentioned case laws, I am of the opinion that no useful purpose will be served by keeping the petitioner in custody and resultantly, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bond and surety bond to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned, on usual terms and conditions. However, in addition to the terms and conditions that may be imposed by the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned, petitioner shall remain bound by the following conditions:-