205 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : 28.02.2025 Surjit Singh .....Petitioner versus State of Punjab ..... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ Present :- Mr. Ashish Pal Kaushal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Karunesh Kaushal, AAG, Punjab.

RAJESH BHARDWAJ , J. (Oral)

1. Petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing the present second petition praying for grant of regular bail to him in case FIR No.17 dated 22.01.2024, under Sections 18/25/27/29/61/85 of NDPS Act, 1985 and Section 25 of Arms Act, 1959, registered at Police Station Chherarta District Amritsar.

2. Succinctly facts of the case are that the police party on 22.01.2024, received a secret information to the effect that Surjit Singh and Gurkirat Singh, both were involved in selling intoxicant substance. It was informed that they were travelling in Fortuner Car bearing Registration No.PB 02 BU 5555 and in case of barricade, they could be arrested along with the contraband. On receiving the information, the raiding team was constituted and barricading was laid, vehicle as disclosed was stopped and driver of the vehicle disclosed his name to be Surjit Singh whereas, the person sitting by the side disclosed his name as Gurkirat Singh. They were suspected to be carrying the contraband and thus, they were given the offer to be searched. On conducting the search of Surjit Singh (petitioner), from the polythene bag beneath his upper jacket, wrapped in a red piece of cloth, which was tied around his waist, opium weighing 2 kg 600 grams was recovered. Similarly, search of Gurkirat Singh was also conducted and from the right pocket of his jacket, a polythene bag containing the opium weighing 400 grams was recovered. Both of them failed to produce any license regarding the possession of the same and hence, both were arrested on the spot. On registration of the FIR, investigation commenced. The samples taken were sent to the FSL. Petitioner approached the Court of learned Judge, Special Court, Amritsar praying for grant of bail. However, after hearing counsel for the parties, learned Judge, Special Court declined the same vide order dated 02.05.2024. Being aggrieved, petitioner earlier approached this Court by way of filing CRM-M-33692- 2024 however, the same was dismissed as not pressed by this Court vide order dated 21.08.2024. Hence, petitioner is before this Court by way of filing the present second petition.

3. It has been contended by counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that the FIR in the present case has been registered on the basis of the secret information however, there is a violation of the mandatory provisions of Section 42 of the NDPS Act. He submits that no independent witness has joined. He further submits that as per the prosecution, the recovery effected is from the person of the petitioner but there is a violation of the mandatory provisions of Section 50 of the NDPS Act as well. He submits that though petitioner has been falsely implicated in one more case however, he has completed his sentence in the same. He submits that the petitioner is behind bars since the date of his arrest however, till date, there is no progress in the trial and the prosecution is prolonging the trial in order to prolong the incarceration of the petitioner. He submits that in the facts and circumstances of the case, petitioner deserves to be granted bail.

4. Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. He, on instructions from Inspector Vinod Sharma, submits that on due compliance of the statutory provisions of the NDPS Act, recovery was effected from the petitioner. He submits that from the search of the petitioner, 2 kg 600 grams of opium was recovered whereas, from the co-accused 400 grams of opium was recovered. Thus, in all from both of them, 3 kg opium has been recovered which is a commercial quantity and th