IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Reserved on: 01.12.2025 Date of Decision: 15.12.2025 Manjeet Kaur ......Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA PARTAP SINGH Present: Mr. Vijay Lath, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. I.P.S. Sabharwal, DAG, Punjab.

SURYA PARTAP SINGH , J . (Oral) :

For the commission of offence punishable under Sections 22 and

29 of Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, hereinafter referred to as ‘NDPS Act’ [Section 27 of NDPS Act and Section 111 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, added later on], the FIR No.42 dated 22.03.2025, has been lodged in Police Station Sadar Rupnagar, District Rupnagar. The petitioner has been arrested in the above mentioned case as an accused. Since the petitioner is in custody, he has filed the present petition for the benefit of bail. This is first petition for bail under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Surakhsa Sanhita, 2023.

2. Briefly stating the facts emerging from record are that the FIR of this case came into being when a police party spotted two persons, one male and one female (petitioner), sitting on a cemented bench and searching something in an envelope kept between them. According to prosecution, when they noticed the presence of police party they apparently got nervous, and therefore, on the basis of suspicion when the contents of above mentioned polythene bag were checked, it was found that in the above mentioned bag they were carrying 12 injections ‘Buprenorphine’ (2 ml each). According to prosecution in view of above mentioned recovery, necessary formalities with regard to seizure and sealing of psychotropic substance, lodging of FIR and arrest of petitioner were performed, and further investigation undertaken. As per prosecution during the course of investigation when the above named person ‘Manjit Kaur’ and ‘Rinku Singh’ were interrogated, they suffered their respective disclosure statement, wherein they nominated ‘Gurpreet Singh @

Jatta’ as supplier of the contraband.

3. Heard.

4. It has been contented on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is a law abiding citizen and despite being innocent she has been falsely implicated in the present case. While alleging that the petitioner has no nexus, whatsoever, with the commission of alleged crime, it has been contended on behalf of petitioner that repeatedly the petitioner is being falsely implicated in the cases under Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, hereinafter being referred to as ‘NDPS Act’ and that in the past also, on four occasions false cases were planted against the petitioner and out of those 4 cases in 3 cases she has been acquitted. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also contended that a campaign in the name of ‘Nasha Mukt Punjab; has been launched by the Government, and in order to show its performance in the above mentioned campaign false cases are being planted against the persons, who had faced similar kind of prosecution in the past.

5. In addition to above, the learned counsel for the petitioner has also contended that the allegations against the petitioner are of being in possession of 12 injection of ‘Buprenorphine’, and that the total quantity of the contents of above mentioned injection comes out to be 24 ml, against the prescribed limit for commercial quantity of 20 grams. As per learned counsel for the petitioner, the fact that the petitioner has been prosecuted in the past cannot have an impact on the out come of present bail petition in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of ‘Prabhakar Tiwari Vs. State of U.P. (2020) 2 SCALE 448’ and ‘Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi Vs. State of U.P. and another, 2012 AIR (SC) (Cri) 469’, and also by this Court in the case of ‘Gurpreet Singh @ Jatta Vs. State of Punjab, CRM-M-51199 of 2025’ and ‘Talwinder Singh @ Mintu Vs. State of Punjab, CRM-M-58043-2023’. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also contended that