JUDGMENT :

Mahabir Singh Sindhu, J.

1. Present petition has been filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') in FIR No.22 dated 21.01.2025, registered under Sections 309(4) and 191(3) read with Section 190 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNS') and Sections 21-C, 25, 27-A and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'NDPS Act') at Police Station Anti Narcotics Task Force (ANTF), Mohali, with the following prayer(s):-

(i) to declare the arrest of petitioner as illegal, non est and arbitrary;

(ii) to set aside the impugned remand order dated 19.03.2025 (P-3) passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Amritsar (for short 'JMIC'), whereby petitioner was remanded to police custody for three days;

(iii) to release petitioner from custody forthwith and also to preserve the entire record, including the file notings and case diaries of present case pertaining to FIR No. 22 dated 21.01.2025 (supra); and

(iv) to direct interim release of petitioner during pendency of present petition.

2. Allegations are that drug money of 20,000 Euro, 10,000 British Pound and 10,020 Canadian Dollars were recovered from the residence of petitioner situated at Subhash Nagar, Phagwara. Also alleged that an amount of Rs.13,30,000/-, one DVR and Currency Counting Machine were recovered from Sharma Forex Money Changer, Phagwara, which is run by the petitioner.

3. CONTENTIONS

ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER

3.1 Learned Senior counsel contends that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case; he has not been named in the present FIR; nor his name surfaced on the basis of disclosure made by any co-accused.

3.2 Again contends that no 'grounds of arrest' were furnished to the petitioner, which is mandatory; hence his arrest is per se illegal.

3.3 Further contends that even after arrest of petitioner, due procedure of law was not followed by the Investigating Agency, as none of his family members had been informed regarding alleged arrest.

3.4 Also contends that there is no incriminating material available with the Investigating Agency against petitioner; hence his arrest cannot be justified by any stretch of imagination.

3.5 Still further contends that premises of petitioner at Phagwara was locked; but the police team broke open the lock in the absence of petitioner and conducted alleged search without following mandatory procedure prescribed under Section 165 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') (now 185 BNSS).

3.6 Again contends that even seizure of alleged drug money and other articles by the police party was illegal being conducted de hors the provisions of Section 185 BNSS.

3.7 Lastly contends that false and frivolous case has been implanted upon the petitioner by police, just to malign his reputation in the society and to extort money; hence petition deserves to be allowed.

3.8 In support of above contentions, learned Senior counsel relied upon following judicial pronouncements:-

(i) Pankaj Bansal Versus Union of India and others, 2023 SC Online SC 1244;

(ii) Prabir Purkayastha v. State (NCT of Delhi) 2024 SCC Online SC 934; and

(iii) Vihaan Kumar v. State of Haryana & another, 2025 SCC Online SC 269.

ON BEHALF OF STATE

4. Per contra, learned State counsel vehemently opposed the prayer of petitioner, while submitting that he was arrested on the basis of secret information and in pursuance thereof, recovery of drug money to the tune of Rs.13,30,000/-, one DVR and currency counting machine was effected from the premises of petitioner at Phagwara i.e. Sharma Forex Money Changer.

4.1 Further submits that on 18.03.2025 at 12.30 p.m., house of petitioner was searched at Subhash Nagar, Phagwara, leading to recovery of drug money of 20,000 Euro, 10,000 British Pound and 10,020 Canadian Dollars without any valid documents in this regard.

4.2 Also submits that petitioner is member of a cartel along with other co-accused, who are selling contraband; receiving huge