SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 1268

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
SAVITA GARG – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB – Respondent



##PAGE1##

CRM-M-58404-2025 (O&M) 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH

(223) CRM-M-58404-2025 (O&M)

Date of decision : 05.02.2026

SAVITA GARG

... Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA

Present: Mr. Sandeep Wadhawan, Advocate and

Mr. Gurjot Singh, Advocate for the petitioner

Mr. Roshandeep Singh, AAG, Punjab

**** (cid:1)

MANISHA BATRA, J. (ORAL)

1. The instant petition has been filed 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.103 dated 13.08.2024 registered

under Sections 21(C), 25 and 29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances

Act, 1985 (for short “NDPS”) at Police Station Dugri, District Ludhiana.

2. As per the allegations, on 12/13.08.2024, the accused Jasjot Singh

and Khushmandar Singh @ Mandar were apprehended by Police and they were

found to be in conscious possession of 21,000 and 9,000 intoxicating tablets of

Alprazolam 0.5 mg and drug money of Rs.15,050/-. They were formally

arrested. During the course of investigation, the accused-Deepak Garg, Sandeep

Singh and the present petitioner were nominated as additional accused on the

1 of 4

::: Downloaded on - 09-02-2026 04:09:39 :::

##PAGE2##

CRM-M-58404-2025 (O&M) 2

basis of the disclosure statements recorded by the accused Jasjot Singh and

Khushmandar Singh @ Mandar to the effect that they used to purchase

intoxicating tablets from the accused Deepak Garg and the present petitioner.

The present petitioner and accused Deepak Garg were arrested on the same day

and recovery of 1050 tablets of Alprazolam was effected from Deepak Garg.

The accused Sandeep Singh was also arrested subsequently. Two more persons

namely Vikash Harish @ Vicky and Rahul Hans @ Rahul were nominated as

accused. It was found during the course of further investigation that the

petitioner had concealed a packet of intoxicating tablet at the residence of her

neighbourer Rekha Rani. The petitioner was arrested on 23.07.2025 and she too

suffered disclosure statement admitting her involvement in the crime.

Investigation qua her stands concluded.

3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that she has been

falsely implicated in this case. In fact, she is a victim at the hands of Police

officials of CIA Staff. Her son had been taken into illegal detention on the

intervening night of 12/13.08.2024 by the officials of CIA, Ludhiana. A false

recovery has been planted in this case. No recovery has been effected at her

instance. The story that she had concealed some intoxicating tablets at her

neighbour’s house has not been substantiated as such no recovery has been

effected even from the neighbourhood. Even she had been illegally detained for

a period of 10 hours by the Police officials and was constrained to file a writ

petition before this Court. Out of vendetta, she was implicated as accused

subsequently by the Police officials. She is in custody since long. The

investigation stands concluded. Trial will take considerable time to conclude.

2 of 4

::: Downloaded on - 09-02-2026 04:09:40 :::

##PAGE3##

CRM-M-58404-2025 (O&M) 3

Her antecedents are clean. Her further incarceration would not serve any useful

purpose. It is, thus, argued that she deserve to be released on bail.

4. Per contra, learned State counsel has argued that the petitioner was

actively involved in sale of intoxicating tablets in connivance with her son and

the co-accused. The allegations against her are serious in nature. There are

chances of her committing similar offences, if extended benefit of bail. The

rigors of Section 37 of NDPS are attracted qua her. It is, therefore, stressed that

the petition does not deserve to be allowed.

5. The petitioner is alleged to be involved in the business of sale of

intoxicating tablets alongwith her son, who was running a chemist shop. No

recovery has been effected from her. She was nominated at a subsequent stage

of investigation. On disclosure statements allegedly suffered by

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top