JUDGMENT :

RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL, J.

1. Prayer in the instant petition filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.66 dated 07.05.2024 registered under Sections 15/61/85 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, at Police Station City Khanna, District Ludhiana.

2. Brief facts of the present case as per the prosecution are that on 07.05.2024, SI Jaswinder Singh, along with his fellow police officials was on patrolling duty and on suspicion, intercepted a truck which was occupied by the petitioner and one Sukhdev Singh. Upon checking the said truck, 100 kg. of poppy husk was recovered. Hence, the present FIR.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has no concern with the said offence. He further contends that mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act were not complied with at the time of alleged search and seizure. He argued that recovery of alleged contraband has already been effected and nothing more is to be recovered from him. He further argued that the petitioner is not the owner of the truck. Moreover, the petitioner has clean antecedents as he is not involved in any other case. The petitioner is in custody since 07.05.2024. The investigation in the case is complete, challan stands presented and charges have also been framed. He further submits that there are total 14 prosecution witnesses but none has been examined till date and as such, the trial will take a long time to conclude and no useful purpose would be served by keeping him behind bars. Therefore, it is urged that the petition deserves to be allowed.

4. Notice of motion.

5. Learned State counsel, who has appeared on advance notice of the petition, has filed the custody certificate of the petitioner, which is taken on record. He has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail by submitting that the offence committed by the petitioner is serious in nature. He argued that the petitioner, along with co-accused Kashmir Singh @ Kashmira Singh, was apprehended at the spot with heavy quantity of alleged contraband, which falls under the commercial quantity. However, he has not controverted the fact that the petitioner is a first time offender as he is not involved in any other case.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties at length and after perusing the record of the case, it is evident that the petitioner is in custody for the last more than 01 year and 08 months; he has clean antecedents, investigation is complete; challan stands presented; charges have been framed; out of total 14 witnesses, none has been examined till date; the complicity of the petitioner is a matter of trial, and the trial is likely to take a long time to conclude. No useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in further custody. His continued detention without the prospect of the trial being concluded in the near future would be violative of his rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

7. Reliance is placed upon a judgment in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. 2018(2) R.C.R. (Criminal) 131 wherein Hon’ble Apex Court has held that keeping somebody behind the bars, till his guilt is proved, for an indefinite period amounts to infringement of his right to life and liberty, as enshrined under Article 21 of Constitution of India and is against the principle “bail is a rule” and “jail is an exception”.

8. A two-Judge Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in Nandlal Mondal @ Abhay Mondal v. State of West Bengal, SLP (Crl.) No.12788/2023, granted bail to the accused after 18 months of incarceration on the ground of delay in trial in an NDPS matter involving commercial quantity of contraband. Similar relief has been granted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in a series of judgments, namely: Md. Aliul Islam @ Aliul Islam @ Najbul Hoque v. State of West Bengal, SLP (Crl.) No.1417