IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Reserved on: 01.08.2025 Pronounced on: 29.08.2025 Balwinder Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present: Mr. P.S. Sekhon, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Jasdev Singh Thind, DAG, Punjab.

****

ANOOP CHITKARA, J.

FIR No. Dated Police Station Sections

93 19.06.2024 STF Mohali 22/29 of NDPS Act

1. The petitioner apprehending arrest in the FIR captioned above has come up before this Court under Section 438 CrPC, seeking anticipatory bail.

2. As per paragraph 13 of the bail petition, the petitioner has no criminal antecedents.

3. The facts and allegations are taken from the status report 31.07.2025 filed by the State. On 19.06.2024, based on secret information, the Police seized 1300 tablets of Tramadol Hydrochloride Trekem-100 from co-accused Luckybawa Singh possession. During further investigation of the case, 1,57,000 tablets of NRX make Tramadol Hydrocholoride Trekem-100 were also recovered from the co-accused Lucky Bawa Singh. The Investigator claims to have complied with all the statutory requirements of the NDPS Act, 1985, and CrPC, 1973. During custodial interrogation, the co-accused disclosed that the intoxicant tablets which were recovered has been supplied to him by the petitioner.

4. Vide order dated 29.08.2024, the co-ordinate Bench of this Court had granted interim bail to the petitioner and the said order is continuing till date.

5. The petitioner’s counsel submits that the recovery in the present case was effected from co-accused Lucky Bawa Singh on 19.06.2024 and as per the recovery memo dated 19.06.2024, 103 strips each containing 10/10 tablets total 1300 tablets make Trekam-100 bearing batch No.NT-2471 date of Manufacturing June, 2024, date of expiry May, 2026 were recovered. It is pertinent to mention here that the alleged recovery tablets were manufacture in the month of June, 2024 and per affidavit dated 31.07.2025 petitioner exchanged 7 calls from 07.12.2023 to 22.02.2024 (para 13), so the aforesaid calls allegedly exchanged between the petitioner and co-accused could not have been in relation to the alleged recovered tablets manufactured in the month of June, 2024, so false implication of the petitioner could not be ruled out.

6. The petitioner's counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent conditions and contends that further pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and his family.

7. State counsel opposes bail on the ground that the manufacturing date may be fake and even if the manufacturing date is of June, 2024, there is no authenticity that it was actually manufactured on such date and usually the Drug Companies given the manufacturing date of later dates, so that expiry date is also extended. Further, a massive recovery of more than lakh tablets effected from the main accused and there is call details between the petitioner and co-accused using whatsapp numbers and international numbers as mentioned in para 10 of the reply dated 03.02.2025.

REASONING:

8. As per the status report, the name of the contraband is Tramadol, and it obviously falls in commercial quantity, and it constitutes an offense under the following provisions and notifications:

Substance Name Tramadol Drug's Small & Commercial Qty. suggested by Committee report Notification No. & date S.O. 1762 (E) dated 26.04.2018 Punishable U/s S.22(a) of NDPS Act, 1985

0 Declared as punishable under NDPS Act and as per schedule defined in S.2(xi) &

2(xxiii) NDPS Act, 1985 S.O.1761(E) & S.O. 26-Apr-2018 &

Notification No. & dated

344