JUDGMENT :

Manisha Batra, J. 

1. The instant petition has been preferred by the petitioner under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for grant of regular bail in case arising out of FIR No.271 dated 04.09.2024, registered under Sections 22(c) and 27A of the NDPS Act, at Police Station Sadar Tohana, District Fatehabad.

2. As per the allegations, on 04.09.2024, the petitioner along with co-accused Kulwinder @ Kalu @ Kulbinder Singh had been found in conscious possession of 900 tablets containing Tramadol Hydrochloride. The recovered tablets were taken into possession by the police. The petitioner and co-accused were formally arrested.

3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case. A false recovery has been planted upon him. He is in custody since 04.09.2024. The investigation stands concluded. The trial will take considerable time to conclude as only 02 out of 33 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far. His continued detention would not serve any useful purpose. Co-accused Kulwinder @ Kalu @ Kulbinder Singh has been extended benefit of bail. On parity, he too deserves to be extended the same benefit. It is, therefore, argued that the petition deserves to be allowed.

4. Status report has been filed. Learned State counsel has argued that keeping in view the gravity of the allegations and the fact that rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are attracted in this case, the petitioner does not deserve to be extended benefit of bail.

5. This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties at considerable length.

6. The petitioner is in custody since 04.09.2025. Co-accused Kulwinder @ Kalu @ Kulbinder Singh has been extended benefit of bail. The petitioner is shown to be involved in six other cases. As per the custody certificate, none of these cases is under the provisions of the NDPS Act. There are no chances of conclusion of trial in near future. It is well settled proposition of law that grant of bail on account of delay in trial and long period of incarceration is to be considered in the light of Section 37 of the NDPS Act. Reliance in this regard can be placed upon the observations made by Hon’ble Apex Court in Mohd. Muslim @ Hussain v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2023 SCC OnLine SC 352, wherein it was held that grant of bail on account of undue delay in trial cannot be said to be fettered under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, given the imperative of Section 436-A of Cr.P.C. which is applicable to offence under the Act. It was also observed that jails are overcrowded and their living conditions are, more often than not, appalling. The danger of unjustified imprisonment is that inmates are more likely to be hardened rather than reformed. Reliance can also be placed upon Manmandal and another v. State of West Bengal, Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No.8656 of 2023 decided on 14.09.2023 and Rabi Prakash v. State of Odisha, 2023 Live Law (SC) 533, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court had extended benefit of bail to the accused who had been incarcerated for a long period by observing that prolonged incarceration militated against the most precious fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution and in such a situation, the constitutional principles must override the statutory embargo contained under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. 7. Reliance can also be placed upon Santosh Pawar Vs. State of Chhattishgarh & Anr., Criminal Appeal No.4883/2025, which is a recently pronounced verdict of Hon’ble Supreme Court observing that rigors of Section 37 of NDPS Act will not be a bar for considering the case of an accused for bail as it comes with a condition that the prosecution would press for an early completion of trial. In the abovementioned case the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that appellant who was being prosecuted for being in possession of commercial quantity of narcotic substance, was entitled for bail in view of