##PAGE1##

CRM-M No.5444 of 2026 -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

239 *****

CRM-M No.5444 of 2026 Date of decision : 24.3.2026

Date of uploading : 25.3.2026

Manjit Singh alias Kaka ………….Petitioner Versus

State of Punjab …….Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL

Present: Mr. Barjinder Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner

Mr. Jaypreet Singh, DAG, Punjab

---

SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL)

1. Present petition has been filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.5 dated 3.2.2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 21-C, 25 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’) at Police

Station City Bhindi Saidan, District Amritsar.

2. The gravamen of the allegations against the petitioner is that he is an accused of being involved in an FIR pertaining to NDPS Act involving 2.5 Kgs. of heroin allegedly recovered from the petitioner and

his co-accused.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 3.2.2025. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further

ASHWANI KUMAR

2026.03.25 10:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M No.5444 of 2026 -2-

submitted that the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act have not been complied with, and thus, the prosecution case suffers from inherent defects. Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the trial is delayed and the liability thereof cannot be fastened upon the petitioner. Learned counsel has further iterated that the petitioner has suffered incarceration for about 01 year and 01 month. Thus, regular bail is prayed

for.

4. Learned State counsel has filed status report today in Court today. The same be kept on record. Raising submissions in tandem with the said status report, learned State counsel has opposed the present petition by arguing that the allegations raised against the petitioner are serious in nature and, thus, he does not deserve the concession of the regular bail. Learned State counsel has further submitted that the instant bail plea is restricted by the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, and thus, the same ought to be dismissed. Learned State counsel seeks to place on record custody certificate dated 21.3.2026 in Court, 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 3.2.2025 whereinafter, investigation was carried out and the challan was presented on 30.7.2025. Total 28 prosecution witnesses have been cited, but none has been examined till date as charges are not framed. The rival contentions raised at Bar give rise to debatable issues shall be ratiocinated upon during the

ASHWANI KUMAR

2026.03.25 10:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M No.5444 of 2026 -3-

course of trial. This Court does not deem it appropriate to delve deep into these rival contentions, at this stage, lest it may prejudice the trial. Nothing tangible has been brought forward to indicate the likelihood of the petitioner absconding from the process of justice or interfering with

the prosecution evidence.

6.1. The trial is indeed procrastinating and folly thereof cannot be saddled upon the petitioner. As per custody certificate dated 21.3.2026 filed by the learned State counsel, the petitioner has already suffered incarceration for a period of 01 year, 01 month and 11 days. In this view of the matter, the rigor imposed under Section 37 of the NDPS Act stands

diluted in light of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

6.2 This Court in a judgment titled as Kulwinder versus State of Punjab passed in CRM-M-64074-2024 (2025:PHHC:002695); after relying upon the ratio decidendi of the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Hussainara Khatoon vs. Home Secy., State of Bihar (1980) 1 SCC 81; Abdul Rehman Antulay vs R.S. Nayak (1992) 1 SCC 22