Procedural lapses in the seizure and sampling of contraband under the NDPS Act compromise evidential credibility, justifying the grant of bail to the accused.

ORDER :

Farjand Ali, J.

1. The jurisdiction of this court has been invoked by way of filing an application under Section 483 BNSS at the instance of accused-petitioner. The requisite details of the matter are tabulated herein below:

2. The concise facts of the case as alleged in the FIR are that On 23.08.2023, at around 5:40 PM, Sub-Inspector Sunil Kumar, SHO of Police Station Sadar, Sri Ganganagar, intercepted a grey Swift Dzire (DL9CAK 4582) parked on National Highway 62. The occupant, Liladhar alias Anil, attempted to flee but was apprehended. A search revealed five boxes containing 2500 Tramadol tablets (total weight 1125 grams), possession of which requires a license under the NDPS Act, which the accused did not have. The petitioner stated that he bought the tablets from Gurmel Singh, and his statement was recorded under Section 67 NDPS Act. He was arrested, and the seized tablets were properly sampled and documented. Investigation revealed the tablets were sourced from another accused, Beant Singh. A charge sheet was filed against the applicant under Sections 8 , 22, and 25 of the NDPS Act, and charges were framed under Sections 8 , 22, and 29. of the NDPS Act. His first bail application being SBCRLMB No.15890/2024 was dismissed as not pressed by this Court vide order dated 27.01.2025. Hence the instant bail application.

3. It is contended on behalf of the accused-petitioner that no case for the alleged offences is made out against him and his incarceration is not warranted. There are no factors at play in the case at hand that may work against grant of bail to the accused- petitioner and he has been made an accused based on conjectures and surmises.

4. Contrary to the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application and submits that the present case is not fit for enlargement of accused on bail.

5. Have considered the submissions made by both the parties and have perused the material available on record.

5.1. The prosecution case unfolds that on 23.08.2023, police officials from Police Station Sadar, Sri Ganganagar, led by the SHO, intercepted a grey Swift Dzire bearing registration number DL9CAK 4582, which was found parked along National Highway 62. The vehicle's occupant, identified as Liladhar alias Anil, attempted to abscond upon sighting the police but was promptly apprehended. Subsequent search of the vehicle resulted in the seizure of five boxes containing a total of 2,500 Tramadol tablets, amounting to 1,125 grams in weight. It is pertinent to note that possession of such quantity necessitates a valid license under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, which the accused failed to produce. Upon interrogation, the petitioner admitted to having procured the tablets from one Gurmel Singh, and his statement was recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act.

5.2. This Court feels weight in the submissions advanced by the counsel for the petitioner that the prosecution has disregarded the procedural safeguards enshrined under Rules 3, 8, 9, and 13 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Seizure, Search, Sampling, and Disposal) Rules, 2022 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules of 2022’), which compounds the legal infirmity so also ignored the gu