217 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-7360-2026 Date of decision : 13.02.2026 Rahul .....Petitioner versus State of Haryana ..... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ Present :- Mr. Navdeep Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Diya Sodhi, Senior DAG, Haryana.

RAJESH BHARDWAJ , J. (Oral)

1. Petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing the present petition praying for grant of regular bail to him in case FIR No.285 dated 25.11.2024, under Section 22(C) of the NDPS Act, 1985, registered at Police Station Linepar Bahadurgarh, District Jhajjar.

2. Succinctly facts of the case are that the police while on patrolling on 25.11.2024, received a secret information to the effect that Amarjeet @ Amar son of Samunder and Rahul (petitioner) son of Ramesh were involved in selling narcotic substances filled in injections outside their rented room in Vikas Nagar. If the raid is conducted, they could be arrested along with the contraband. On receiving the secret information, the police reached at the disclosed place along with the recent informer. Two youngsters were identified by the secret informer. Both were apprehended. On asking, they disclosed their names as Amarjeet @ Amar and Rahul. They were suspected to be carrying contraband thus, their personal search was conducted. From the personal search of right and left pockets of black colour lower worn by Amarjeet @ Amar, 35 injections make Buprenorphine was recovered whereas, from both the pockets of the jeans pant worn by Rahul, 25 injections make Buprenorphine were recovered. They failed to produce any license regarding the possession of the same thus, FIR was registered and they were arrested on the spot. Investigation commenced and samples taken were sent to the FSL. On receiving the FSL report, challan was presented and on framing of the charges, trial commenced. Petitioner approached the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jhajjar praying for grant of regular bail. However, after hearing counsel for the parties, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jhajjar dismissed the same vide order dated 17.10.2025. Hence, being aggrieved, petitioner is before this Court by way of filing the present petition.

3. It has been submitted by counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely and frivolously implicated in the present case. He has submitted that the case of the prosecution is based on the secret information however, there is violation of provisions of Section 42 of the NDPS Act. He further submits that the alleged recovery is from the public place however, no independent witness has been joined. He has submitted that there is violation of Section 50 of the NDPS Act as well. He has further submitted that as per the case of the prosecution, the recovery is effected from the personal search of the accused and co-accused. However, from the petitioner the alleged recovery of 25 injections were effected and recovery of rest of the 35 injections was effected from the co-accused. To buttress his arguments, he has submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents as he has never been involved in any other case. He has further submitted that all the prosecution witnesses are the officials witnesses however, till date, only 06 witnesses have been examined. He thus, submits that, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner deserves to be granted regular bail.

4. Learned State counsel, on the other hand, has opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. She submits that petitioner along with co-accused was specifically named in the secret information. She further submits that both of them were arrested on the spot. He further submits that in total 60 injections were recovered from both the petitioner and co-accused. She has submitted that the contraband recovered in the present case is 120 grams of Buprenorphine which falls under the commercial quantity thus, provisions of Section 37 of