229 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 08.05.2025 Lovepreet Singh @ Love ..... Petitioner Versus State of Punjab .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ Present: Mr. Madan Sandhu, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. J.S. Arora, DAG, Punjab.

Rajesh Bhardwaj, J. (ORAL)

1. Petitioner has approached this Court by way of present petition praying for granting regular bail in a case FIR No.58 dated 01.10.2024 under Section 21 of the NDPS Act, 1985, at Police Station Talwandi Chaudrian, District Kapurthala.

2. Succinctly, facts of the case are that on 01.10.2024, the police party while on patrolling saw two persons coming on motorcycle on high speed, who on seeing the police got perplexed and started turning the motorcycle back, however, the motorcycle slipped and they fell down. Both of them were overpowered by the police party. On asking the driver of the motorcycle disclosed his name as Lovepreet Singh @ Love (petitioner) and the pillion rider disclosed name as Amitdeep Singh. They were suspected to be carrying intoxicant substances and thus, were given offer to be searched. On conducting search of Lovepreet Singh @ Love, 51 grams of heroin was recovered from his pocket, whereas, on search of pocket of other person namely, Amitdeep Singh, 10 grams of heroin was recovered. They failed to produce any licence regarding the possession of the same. Hence, the FIR was registered and they were arrested on the spot. On registration of the FIR, the investigation commenced. Samples of both the recoveries were taken separately and sent to the FSL. On receiving the FSL report, intoxicant allegedly recovered from the petitioner was found to be 51 grams of Methamphetamine. The petitioner approached the Court of learned Judge, Special Court, Kapurthala praying for grant of regular bail. However, after hearing both the sides, the learned Court finding no merit in the same, dismissed the bail application filed by the petitioner vide order dated 18.11.2024. Hence, the petitioner has approached this Court praying for grant of regular bail by way of filing the present petition.

3. It has been vehemently contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that recovery in the present case has been allegedly effected from a public place, however, no independent witness has been joined. He further submits that even otherwise recovery is effected from the person of petitioner and hence, there is a violation of Section 50 of the NDPS Act. It is submitted that though the petitioner was alleged to be carrying 51 grams of heroin, however, the as per FSL report, the contraband recovered has been found to be Methamphetamine. He submits that quantity above 50 grams of Methamphetamine is commercial, whereas, from the petitioner, it is alleged to be 51 grams of Methamphetamine which is marginally above the commercial quantity and thus, it is debatable whether the recovery effected is commercial or non-commercial quantity since the alleged recovery as shown in the FIR is 51 of grams of heroin. He submits that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents and he is behind bars since the date of his arrest. He submits that the investigation is complete and charges are also framed, but there is no substantial progress in the trial. He, thus, submits that in the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner deserves to be granted bail.

4. Short affidavit of Gurmeet Singh, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub Division Sultanpur Lodhi, District Kapurthala filed in Court is taken on record. Per contra, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. He has submitted that recovery from both the accused was effected on due compliance of mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act. He submits that recovery effected from the petitioner is 51 grams of Methamphetamine, which is a commercial quan