The main legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement to regular bail under the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, based on the period of custody, progress in the trial, and the nature of the substance involved.

JUDGMENT

B.S. Walia, J. (Oral) - Prayer in the second petition under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner during pendency of trial in case FIR No.0325 dated 10.11.2020, registered under Section 22 of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, at Police Station Kathu Nangal, District Amritsar.

2. Learned counsel contends that CRM-M-30963-2021, was permitted to be withdrawn at that stage vide order dated 18.08.2021 whereas the instant petition has been filed subsequently on account of no progress having been made in the trial.

3. Learned counsel contends that the petitioner is in custody since 10.11.2020, challan has been presented, charges have been framed and out of 11 prosecution witnesses not even a single prosecution witness has been examined.Learned counsel contends that the petitioner is entitled to be released on regular bail in view of the decision of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Chhita Biswas alias Subhas vs. State of West Bengal, SLP (Crl.) No.8823 of 2019, law finder doc ID #1938935, Narcotic Control Bureau vs. VipanSood and another, Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No.5852 of 2021, upholding the order of a coordinate bench of this Court granting regular bail to accused therein vide order dated 25.02.2021, in CRM-M-20177-2020 as also in view of the decision of this Court in Amritpal Singh vs. State of Punjab CRM-M-53334-2021, decided on 07.04.2022. Learned counsel for the petitioner also refers to order dated 31.05.2021, to contend that there is violation of Section 50 of the NDPS Act and that in view of the decisions of this Court in case titled as Gannu and another vs. State of Punjab 2017 (3) RCR (Criminal) 566, Kewal Krishan vs. State of Punjab 2018 (4) RCR (Criminal) 580 and Manorama Devi vs. State of Haryana 2018 (2) RCR (Criminal) 339, entire proceedings stand vitiated and that continued detention of the petitioner is illegal, in view of mentioning of FIR number in the recovery/arrest memo.

4. Learned AAG, Punjab, does not dispute that the petitioner has been in custody since 10.11.2020, challan has been presented, charges have been framed, and out of eleven prosecution not even a single witness has been examined till date and that the recovery from the petitioner was of 860 intoxicant tablets and the salt in the same was 'alprazolam' and as per Sr. No.178 of the Central Government Notification, the salt 'alprazolam' above 100 grams falls in commercial quantity, besides, as per report of the Chemical Examiner, 'alprazolam' salt was found in the contraband and total weight of the same was 125.5 grams, which falls in the category of commercial quantity. However, learned AAG, Punjab, has not cited any judgment contrary to the judgments cited by learned counsel for the petitioner but states that the petitioner is involved in another case under the NDPS Act i.e. FIR No.323 dated 09.11.2020, registered under Section 22 of the NDPS Act on the basis of disclosure statement of the co-accused but concedes that no recovery was effected from the petitioner in said case.

5. I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties.

6. In Chitta Biswas alias Subhas's case (supra), before Hon'ble the Supreme Court, it was argued that the petitioner therein had been in custody for one year, six months and seventeen days and out of ten prosecution witnesses only four witnesses had been examined before the trial Court, recovery in said case from the petitioner therein was of 46 bottles of phensydryal cough syrup containing codeine mixture above commercial quantity, prayer for regular bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. was rejected by Hon'ble the Calcutta High Court but Hon'ble the Supreme Court was pleased to grant regular bail to the petitioner therein in view of the facts and circumstances on record, subject to the petitioner furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.2 Lakh with two like sureties to the satisfaction of the Judge, Special Court, NDPS Act, Nadia at Krishnagar