221 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Satnam Singh ….Petitioner versus State of Punjab ….Respondent Date of Decision: February 03, 2026 Date of Uploading: February 03, 2026 CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present:- Ms. Kadambari Bhan, Advocate and Mr. Vivek Dahiya, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Jaypreet Singh, DAG Punjab.

*****

SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL)

Present second petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, in case bearing FIR No.29 dated 07.03.2025, registered for the offences punishable under Section 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’) (Sections 27-A, 29, 61 and 85 of the NDPS Act and Section 111 of BNS, 2023 added later on), at Police Station Banur, District Patiala.

2. The gravamen of the FIR in question is that the petitioner is an accused of being involved in an FIR pertaining to NDPS Act involving alleged recovery of 900 intoxicant tablets (Diphenoxylate Hydrochloride and Atropine Sulphate) weighing 55.8 grams from the petitioner.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the petitioner is in custody since 07.03.2025. Learned counsel iterated that earlier, vide order dated 13.10.2025, the petitioner was accorded the benefit of interim regular bail for a period of 01 month and upon availing the said benefit, the petitioner has surrendered back to the custody in time. Learned counsel has further submitted that mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act have not scrupulously been complied with, and thus, the prosecution case suffers from inherent defects. Learned counsel has argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question. Learned counsel has iterated that the contraband alleged to have been recovered from the petitioner is of 900 intoxicant tablets (Diphenoxylate Hydrochloride and Atropine Sulphate) weighing 55.8 grams, which is marginally above the threshold limit of non-commercial quantity specified in the notification issued under the NDPS Act. Learned counsel has further iterated that the petitioner has suffered incarceration for more than 09 months. Thus, regular bail is prayed for.

4. Learned State counsel has opposed the present petition by arguing that the allegations raised against the petitioner are serious in nature and, thus, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of the regular bail. Learned State counsel submits that apart from the said contraband, an amount of Rs.20,000/-, as drug money, has also been recovered from co- accused of the petitioner, namely, Sunil Kumar. Learned State counsel has further submitted that the instant bail plea is barred by the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, and thus, the same ought to be dismissed. Learned State counsel has not controverted the factum of the petitioner having surrendered back to the custody in time after availing concession of interim regular bail, earlier, granted by this Court. Learned State counsel seeks to place on record custody certificate dated 02.02.2026, in the Court today, which is taken on record.

5. I have heard counsel for the rival parties and have gone through the available records of the case.

6. The petitioner was arrested on 07.03.2025, whereinafter, investigation was carried out and challan has been presented on 28.05.2025. Total 15 prosecution witnesses have been cited, out of which, 01 has been examined fully and 01 has been examined in part till date. Indubitably, conclusion of the trial will take long. The drug money alleged to have been recovered, in this case, is from co-accused of the petitioner, namely, Sunil Kumar. It is not in dispute that the contraband allegedly recovered from the petitioner is 900 intoxicant tablets (Diphenoxylate Hydrochloride and Atropine Sulphate) weighing 55.8 grams, which is marginally above the threshold limit of non-commercial quantity. Reliance in this regard can be placed u