The court's decision was primarily based on the petitioner's criminal history, the quantity of contraband involved, and the lack of assurance regarding the petitioner's future conduct.

JUDGMENT

Anoop Chitkara, J. -

1. The petitioner incarcerated for violating the above-mentioned provisions of Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) per the FIR captioned above, has come up before this Court under Section 439 CrPC seeking bail.

2. In paragraph 1 of the bail application, the accused declares the following criminal antecedents:

3. The petitioner contends that the pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and family.

4. While opposing the bail, the contention on behalf of the State is that the quantity of contraband involved in the case falls into the commercial category, and given the criminal past, the accused is likely to indulge in crime once released on bail.

REASONING:

5. In Paramjeet Singh v. State of Punjab, 2022:PHHC:003983 [Para 8], CRM-M 50243 of 2021, this court observed, While considering each bail petition of the accused with a criminal history, it throws an onerous responsibility upon the Courts to act judiciously with reasonableness because arbitrariness is the antithesis of law. The criminal history must be of cases where the accused was convicted, including the suspended sentences and all pending First Information Reports, wherein the bail petitioner stands arraigned as an accused. In reckoning the number of cases as criminal history, the prosecutions resulting in acquittal or discharge, or when Courts quashed the FIR; the prosecution stands withdrawn, or prosecution filed a closure report; cannot be included. Although crime is to be despised and not the criminal, yet for a recidivist, the contours of a playing field are marshy, and graver the criminal history, slushier the puddles.

6. A perusal of the petition does not refer to any averment based on which this court is assured that if this recidivist is released on bail, then he shall not indulge in criminal behavior.

7. Prosecutions case is that BSF gave an information on 15.8.2019 that during night hours i.e. at 2.35 A.M. that their patrol suspected movement of some suspicious object floating in river Sutlej at Pakistan border. On chasing the same in the speed boat, one person namely Harjinder Singh was nabbed, who was swimming with the help of a tube. They apprehended the suspected person and on his search, heroin, magazine (Pistol) with ammunition and other items kept in a fertilizer bag tied inside tractor tyre tube were recovered from his possession. The alleged recovery was of 15 kgs. 112 grams of heroin, one Magazine pistol, ammunition of 7.63 MM 31 Rds, one Mobile phone, two Pakistani Sim cards etc. The person who was apprehended revealed his name as Harjinder Singh. On interrogation, he disclosed that the consignment was handed over to him by his Pakistani associate namely Munir Ahmed and he was supposed to hand over the same to his Indian contact. Based on this information, the police registered the FIR captioned above and found involvement of the petitioner -Amrik Singh in the entire drug deal. Not only the co-accused disclosed the petitioners name but even the petitioner, who was confined in jail, was found using mobile phone inside the jail, for which, another case under Section 52A of the Prison Act was registered against him.

8. On