298 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.54801 of 2025 Date of Decision: 08.10.2025 Amandeep Singh @ Aman .....Petitioner versus State of Punjab ..... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ *****

Present :- Mr. Gagandeep Singh Bajwa, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Raj Karan Singh, Asstt. A.G., Punjab.

*****

R AJESH BHARDWAJ , J. (Oral)

1. Present petition has been filed praying for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.112, dated 03.08.2025, under Section 21 of NDPS Act, 1985 (Section 27-A, 29 of NDPS Act added later on), registered at Police Station Chattiwind, District Amritsar Rural.

2. Succinctly the facts of the case are that the police party, while on patrolling on 03.08.2025, received a secret information to the effect that Amandeep Singh @ Aman (petitioner), who drives a three wheeler, is involved in selling of heroin. It was informed that he would come from village Manawala to village Varpal on his three-wheeler and in case of barricading, he could be apprehended along with the contraband. On receiving the secret information, the raiding party was constituted and the barricading was laid. The auto rickshaw, as disclosed in the secret information, was seen coming and thus, the same was stopped by the police. The driver of the auto rickshaw disclosed his name to be Amandeep Singh @ Aman (petitioner). From his possession, 30 grams of heroin was recovered. He failed to produce any licence regarding the conscious possession of the same, thus, the FIR was registered and he was arrested on the spot. On registration of the FIR, the investigation commenced. The samples taken were sent to the FSL. The petitioner approached the Court of learned Judge, Special Court, Amritsar praying for grant of bail, however, after hearing both the sides and finding no merit in the same, the learned Judge, Special Court, Amritsar declined the bail application filed by the petitioner vide order dated 09.09.2025. Hence being aggrieved, the petitioner is before this Court praying for the grant of bail by way of filing the present petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has submitted that the FIR has been registered on the basis of secret information but there is violation of mandatory provisions of Section 42 of NDPS Act. He has submitted that there is a violation of provisions of Section 50 of NDPS Act as well. He has submitted that the recovery has been effected from the public place, however no independent witness has been joined. He has submitted that even otherwise, the alleged recovery effected from the petitioner is 30 grams of heroin, which is a non commercial quantity. He has submitted that the petitioner is behind bars since 03.08.2025. He has submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents as he has never been involved in any other case. He has submitted that in the facts and circumstances, the petitioner deserves to be granted regular bail.

4. Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. He has submitted that the recovery has been effected from the conscious possession of the petitioner. He, on instructions, has submitted that the case is under investigation. He has produced custody certificate of the petitioner today in the Court and the same is taken on record.

5. Heard.

6 On hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is deciphered that the FIR was registered on the basis of secret information. The alleged recovery effected is 30 grams of heroin, which is admittedly a non commercial quantity. Custody certificate produced would show that the petitioner has completed incarceration of 02 months and 03 days as on 07.10.2025. It further shows that the petitioner is not involved in any other case.

7. The veracity of the allegations would be assessed only after the conclusion of the trial