261 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : 10.11.2025 Shivam ....Petitioner versus State of Punjab ..... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ Present :- Mr. Manjot Kaur, Advocate for the petitioner.

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

RAJESH BHARDWAJ , J. (Oral)

1. Present petition has been filed for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.148 dated 21.09.2024, under Sections 21 and 29 of Narcotic and Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, registered at Police Station STF, SAS Nagar, District Mohali.

2. Succinctly, the facts of the present case are that the police party, while on patrolling on 20.09.2024, saw two clean shaved persons on a motorcycle. A polythene bag was hanging on the right handle of the motorcycle. On seeing the police, they got perplexed and tried to turn the motorcycle towards Ambala City. On suspicion, they were apprehended and on asking, they disclosed their names to be Shivam (present petitioner) and Karan. They were suspected to be carrying some contraband in the polythene being carried by them and thus, search of the same was conducted. On conducting the search, 498 grams of heroin was recovered from the same. They failed to produce any licence regarding the conscious possession of the same and thus, FIR was registered and they were arrested on the spot. On registration of the FIR, the investigation commenced. Samples taken were sent to the FSL. The petitioner approached the Learned Judge, Special Court, Patiala praying for grant of bail, however, finding no merit, the same was declined after hearing both the sides by Learned Judge, Special Court, Patiala vide order dated 27.03.2025. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court by way of filing of present petition for grant of bail.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that the alleged recovery has been effected from a public place, however, no independent witness was joined by the investigating agency. He submits that the compliance of Section 50 of NDPS Act, was mandatory in conducting the search, however, there is a violation of the same as well. He submits that the co-accused have been granted bail though they were arrayed as an accused on the basis of disclosure statement of the co-accused. He submits that the petitioner is behind bars since the date of his arrest 21.09.2024, who is suffering from chronic kidney disease. He submits that the petitioner is on dialysis in the Hospital and there is every chance of him getting infection in the Jail. He submits that though petitioner is involved in 02 other cases, however, he is on bail in those cases. He thus, submits that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner deserves to be granted bail.

4. Status report by way of affidavit of Mr. Sanjeev Goyal, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Anti-Narcotics Task Force, Patiala Range, Patiala along with short reply and custody certificate of the petitioner, have been filed on behalf of respondent-State, in the Court today, same are taken on record.

5. Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner and submits that the petitioner was arrested on spot along with the contraband. He submits that the alleged recovery effected is 498 grams of heroin which is a commercial quantity and thus, provisions of Section 37 of NDPS Act, are attracted in the present case. He, on instructions, has submitted that the challan is presented and charges have been framed, however, out of total

22 prosecution witnesses, none has been examined till date

6. After hearing counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is deciphered that the alleged recovery effected from the petitioner is 498 grams of heroin which is a commercial quantity. The medical condition of the petitioner, as contended by learned counsel for the petitioner, is evident fro