245-1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-59667-2023 Date of decision:-11.03.2025 VEERPAL SINGH ... Petitioner Versus STATE OF PUNJAB ... Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY. Present:- Mr. Rishu Mahajan, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Ankit Grewal, DAG, Punjab.

*****

SANJIV BERRY, J.(ORAL)

The instant petition has been preferred by the petitioner under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code, for grant of regular bail in the following case (Annexure P-1):-

FIR No. Dated Sections Police Station

59 06.04.2023 21 (C)/29 of NDPS Sadar Patti, District Taran Act Taran o. 2), Mo

2. Arguments heard.

that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He contends that even otherwise the alleged recovery effected from the petitioner is marginally higher than the non commercial quantity with which the petitioner has no concern. He contends that no other case under NDPS Act is registered against the petitioner and he is in custody since 06.04.2023, after completion of investigation challan has already been presented in Court, wherein prosecution has cited 14 witnesses and till date none of the witness has been examined. Hence prayed for grant of concession of regular bail to the petitioner.

4. Per contra, learned State counsel referring to the reply submitted by the State, has assailed these arguments by submitting that 270 grams of heroin was recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner, which falls within the purview of commercial quantity, as such, he does not deserve concession of bail. However, he has not denied the fact the petitioner is not having any other case registered under NDPS Act and after completion of investigation challan has been presented for trial in which prosecution has cited 14 witnesses and till date none of the witness has been examined.

5. After considering the rival contentions and perusing the record, it transpires that the petitioner is in custody since 06.04.2023 and after completion of investigation, challan has already been presented in Court wherein prosecution has cited 14 witnesses and till date none of the witness has been examined. Petitioner is having clean antecedents. Therefore,

(supra) and also the fact that the conclusion of trial to ascertain criminal

liability, if any will take sufficient long time, no purpose would be served by

detaining the petitioner any longer.

6. Resultantly, in these circumstances, without commenting on the

merits of the case, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to

be released on bail subject to furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court concerned, if not required in any other case; undertaking to regularly appear on each and every date; not to leave the country without prior permission of the Court; and not to tamper with evidence of prosecution in any manner.

7. It is further made clear that in case the petitioner is found involved in any case under NDPS Act, after his release on bail, it will be open for the prosecution to move an application for cancellation of his bail in accordance with law.

8. Any observation made above shall not be construed as opinion of this Court on the merits of the case.

9. Pending application(s) if any shall also stand disposed of.

(SANJIV BERRY)

JUDGE

11.03.2025

Gyan