IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : 28.10.2025 KIRANDEEP KAUR …. PETITIONER V/S STATE OF PUNJAB …. RESPONDENT CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHAS MEHLA Present : Mr.Harkirat Singh Bhogal, Advocate for the petitioner.

****

SUBHAS MEHLA, J. (Oral)

1. The petitioner is seeking regular bail in FIR No.222 dated 10.08.2023, under Sections 22 and 29 of NDPS Act registered at Police Station Tanda, District Hoshiarpur.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that as per the allegations in the FIR, 305 grams of intoxicant powder was allegedly recovered from the petitioner, which on testing was found to contain Tramadol Hydrochloride. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner was initially granted interim bail by the learned Special Judge, Hoshiarpur, on 11.09.2023. However, after the receipt of the FSL report, which declared the contraband as Tramadol, she surrendered before the trial Court in compliance with the bail conditions. The subsequent application for regular bail was dismissed by the trial Court on 06.06.2024. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 10.08.2023 and the trial is likely to take a long time as the case is still at the stage of prosecution evidence. The petitioner undertakes to abide by all conditions imposed by the Court and will not abscond or misuse the concession of bail. It is also submitted that the petitioner is not involved in any other case. Accordingly, a prayer has been made for grant of regular bail to the petitioner during the pendency of the trial.

3. Notice of motion.

4. Mr. Subhash Godara, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, accepted notice on behalf of respondent-State and filed the custody certificate of the petitioner. Learned State counsel submitted that the recovery effected from the petitioner consists of 305 grams of Tramadol Hydrochloride, which falls within the ambit of commercial quantity as the notified commercial limit of Tramadol is 250 grams. Therefore, the bar contained under Section 37 of the NDPS Act is clearly attracted, and the petitioner is not entitled to the concession of bail.

5. Heard.

6. The trial Court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months. In case, the trial is not concluded within the stipulated period, the petitioner shall be at liberty to move an appropriate application for grant of bail. Upon such application being filed, the trial Court shall release the petitioner on bail subject to the condition that his presence during the trial can be secured. Petitioner shall not cause any hindrance or obstruction in the proceedings. If the delay in proceeding is on the part of petitioner, then she shall not be entitled to the aforesaid relief.

7. Disposed of.

(SUBHAS MEHLA)

JUDGE

28.10.2025 anju Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No