IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 14.10.2025 KARAJ SINGH ....Petitioner Versus STATE OF PUNJAB ...Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY Present : Mr. Rishu Mahajan, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Ms. Gagandeep Kaur, DAG, Punjab. AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL)

1. Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.353 dated 15.11.2023, registered under Sections 21/29/61/85 NDPS Act and Section

212 IPC (added later on), at Police Station STF, STF Wing, Mohali.

2. Learned counsel contends that the petitioner has been in custody for 1 year and about 11 months. He alleges false implication. His name surfaced on the disclosure statement of co-accused Kuldeep Singh @ Rana Ghoda, who has since been granted bail on 29.08.2024 as there was no recovery effected from him, however, from the petitioner, 700 grams of heroin, which he states, was planted upon him, as he has clean antecedents. Similarly placed co-accused Bahor Singh @ Sonu, who was also nominated on the disclosure statement of the aforesaid Kuldeep Singh @ Rana Ghoda, was granted anticipatory bail. Charges have been framed on 03.07.2024, however, only 7 out of 25 witnesses have been examined, as stated in para 14 of the status report dated 24.08.2025.

3. The custody certificate dated 13.10.2025, filed by the learned State counsel is taken on record. As per the same, the petitioner is behind bars for 1 year, 10 months and 22 days.

4. Learned State counsel opposes the bail on the ground that the commercial quantity of contraband was recovered from the petitioner. However, she is unable to controvert the submissions with regard to stage of the case and the petitioner being not involved in any other case and co-

accused on bail.

5. Heard.

6. Hon'ble The Supreme Court in Shariful Islam @ Sarif versus The State of West Bengal SLP (Crl.) No.4173/2022, decided on 04.08.2022, granted bail to the petitioner in a case of recovery of commercial quantity of contraband, considering incarceration for over 1 year and 6 months and there being no likelihood of completion of trial in the near future, while the Division Bench of this Court in Bhupender Singh vs. Narcotic Control Bureau (2022) 2 RCR (Crl.) 706, observed with regard to achieving balance between right to speedy trial guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and rigors of Section 37 of NDPS Act.

7. This Court in the case of Balraj Singh vs. State of Punjab CRM-M-57386-2022, on 14.12.2022 has followed the dictum laid down by Hon'ble The Supreme Court and granted the bail to the petitioner therein after he had undergone total custody of 1 year and 6 months and in Munasi Masih vs. State of Punjab, CRM-M-31504-2022, on 06.2.2023, wherein commercial quantity of contraband had been recovered but only 2 out of 13 PWs had been examined, allowed bail.

8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in particular that the petitioner is in custody for the last 1 year, 10 months and 22 days; not involved in any other case; charges stand framed on 03.07.2024, however out of 25 prosecution witnesses, only 7 have been examined as yet; the trial is likely to take a considerable time; further incarceration of the petitioner would be violative of his right enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act can be diluted bearing in mind the right to a speedy trial, the present petition is allowed.

9. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail, subject to furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case and shall abide by the following conditions:-

(i) The petitioner will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

(ii) The petitioner will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

(iii) The petitioner will appear before the trial Court on each and every date fixed, unless i