The recovery of a commercial quantity of contraband establishes grounds to deny bail under the NDPS Act, emphasizing conscious possession principles.

JUDGMENT :

Manisha Batra, J.

1. Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No. 34 dated 15.02.2024, registered under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’) at Police Station Kharar, District SAS Nagar.

2. Brief facts of the case relevant for the disposal of the present petition are that on 15.02.2024, a secret information was received by a police party headed by SI Sukhwinder Singh to the effect that the petitioner, who was habitual in selling drugs, was coming in a car bearing registration number HP-23-D-7947 along with huge quantity of Hashish (Charas). Believing the information to be reliable, a barrier was laid at the informed place and on noticing the said car coming from the side of Govt. Polytechnic College, which was being driven by a young man, the same was signaled to stop. The said person was having a heavy white colour polythene bag in his hand, which he threw on the road on seeing the police party and tried to turn back. However, he was apprehended and on interrogation, he disclosed his name as ‘Aaditya Sharma’, who is the present petitioner. While following the usual formalities as prescribed under the NDPS Act, the search of the said polythene bag was conducted and recovery of 01 kg. 100 grams of Charas was effected from the same. The petitioner was formally arrested at the spot. After completion of necessary investigation and usual formalities, challan under Section 173 of Cr.P.C. was presented in the Court and presently, the petitioner is facing trial for commission of aforementioned offence. He had moved an application for grant of regular bail before the trial Court but the same had been dismissed, vide order dated 02.04.2024.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that he has been falsely implicated in this case. The prosecution story is false and concocted one. Mandatory provisions of Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act were not complied with. The FSL report only states that Tetrahydrocannbol and other Cannabionoid was found in the sample but no percentage is mentioned. Hence, it will be a question of debate as to whether the recovered contraband was Bhang, Ganja or Charas? Even otherwise, the alleged recovery of the contraband was not recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. Investigation has since been completed and challan has been presented. Trial is likely to take time. The petitioner is in judicial custody since 15.02.2024. No useful purpose would be served by keeping him in custody anymore. Therefore, it is urged that the petition deserves to be allowed and the petitioner deserves to be granted benefit of regular bail. To fortify his arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon order dated 19.07.2021 passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court in CRM-M-16150-2021, titled as Balwinder Singh vs. State of Punjab, wherein, while relying upon certain other judgments passed by this Court, the accused was granted regular bail.

4. Per contra, learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, on the basis of the status report, has vehemently argued that the petitioner is not entitled to get benefit of bail as commercial quantity of the contraband was recovered from him. He was duly named in the secret information. His story regarding false implication and plantation of the recovered contraband is concocted one. FSL report has been received, as per which, Charas has been found in the recovered contraband. It is further argued that since the recovery of the contraband effected from the petitioner falls under the comme