JUDGMENT :

Mahabir Singh Sindhu, J.

1. This order shall dispose off afore-mentioned 17 petitions seeking bail pending trial in FIR No.72 dated 23.05.2020, under Sections 21, 22, 25 & 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'NDPS Act'), registered at Police Station, Mehal Kalan, District Barnala.

2. Above FIR was registered on the basis of secret information received on 23.05.2020 at 09:30 PM by police with the allegation that Lovepreet Singh @ Lovy s/o Ajmer Singh; Ravinder Singh @ Binda s/o Nachhattar Singh, residents of Divana; Satvir Singh @ Satti s/o Gurmeet Singh, r/o Chhiniwal Khurd; Balwinder Singh @ Nikka s/o Gurjant Singh, r/o Bakhatgarh and Ravi, r/o Chakkar, in connivance with each other, have formed a racket; engaged in procuring intoxicant tablets & narcotic substance from outside the State and supplying the same in Tallewal, Mehal Kalan and nearby villages to the persons who are involved in such like activities. Also alleged that all of them were seen roaming in Verna Car bearing registration No.PB11-AY-1700 (white colour) around Mehal Kalan Town and they are likely to supply the same in Mehal Kalan Town and nearby areas. If a raid is conducted, all of them can be nabbed along with contraband. The information was found to be credible and as a result thereof, the above FIR was registered.

3. CONTENTIONS ON BEHALF OF PETITIONERS

(I) CRM-M-51040-2024 (RAKESH BANSAL)

(i) Contends that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. Also contends that he is neither named in the FIR (supra); nor any recovery has been effected from him.

(ii) Further contends that petitioner was nominated on the basis of disclosure made by co-accused Jatinder Kumar @ Vicky on 26.07.2020 and was arrested on 22.01.2024 i.e. after a period of four years, for the reasons best known to the prosecution.

(iii) Vehemently contends that petitioner is one of the Directors of Company, namely, Ridley Life Science Private Limited (for short 'RLSP Ltd.') which was authorised to manufacture drugs other than those specified in Schedules C and C(1) to the Drugs Rules, 1945 on the premises situated at D-1651 DSIIDC, Industrial Complex, Narela, Delhi-110040 vide licence No. 1931 dated 01.06.2009 (A-1 colly.) which was renewed from time to time uptill 31.05.2024; thus RLSP Ltd. was well within its right to manufacture the drugs in question.

(iv) Again contends that there is no document on record to show that petitioner had ever sold any drug manufactured by his company i.e. RLSP Ltd. in the State of Punjab; rather the same were sold in the State of Uttar Pradesh where the drugs in question are permissible for sale.

(v) While referring to Rabi Prakash Versus State of Odisha, 2023 SCC Online SC 1109, it is contended that prolonged incarceration militates against most precious fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution and in such a situation, conditional liberty must override statutory embargo created under Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of the NDPS Act. He further relied upon Shince babu versus State of Kerala SLP (Crl.) No. 16642/2023 and Mahendra versus The State of Rajasthan SLP (Crl.) No. 2599/2024 wherein, petitioner(s) were granted bail by relaxing the rigors of Section 37 of NDPS Act in case of long incarceration.

(vi) Again contends that in view of the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court passed in case titled as Tofan Singh versus State of Tamil Nadu, SCC (2021) 4 SCC 1 mere disclosure would not be the basis to fasten any criminal liability upon the petitioner, as the disclosure has no evidentiary value in the eyes of law.

(vii) Lastly contended that petitioner has been arrested after a gap of four years; therefore, he is facing a separate de novo trial in which although, charges have been framed, but out of total 160 prosecution witnesses, only 05 have been examined; hence conclusion of trial will take sufficient long time and no useful purpose will be served by keeping the petitioner behind bars for