SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 23678

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
JASBIR SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA – Respondent



##PAGE1## ##PAGE2##

CRM-M-59619-2025 (O&M) -2-

petitioner was the driver of the truck. The other occupants were co-accused

Hardeep Singh and Parveen Kumar. On conducting search, 07 plastic bags

containing 01 quintal 40 kgs of poppy husk were found kept in the vehicle

which were taken into custody by police. The petitioner and the co-accused

were formally arrested. Investigation now stands concluded.

3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has

been falsely implicated in this case. A false recovery has been planted upon

him. The provisions of the NDPS Act had not been followed by the

Investigating Agency. No Form 29 was sent along with samples to FSL. The

trial will take considerable time to conclude. Further incarceration of the

petitioner would not serve any useful purpose. It is, thus argued that the

petition deserves to be allowed.

4. Per contra, learned State counsel while supporting the pleas as

taken in the status report has argued that there are serious allegations against

the petitioner. Commercial quantity of poppy husk was recovered from the

conscious possession of the petitioner as well as co-accused. The petitioner

is a habitual offender. There are chances of his committing similar offences

again, if extended benefit of bail. Rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are

attracted in this case as commercial quantity of contraband had been

recovered from him. There is no material or substantive change in the

circumstances since the date of dismissal of his previous petition. It is,

therefore, argued that the petitioner is not entitled to be granted benefit of

bail.

5. This Court has heard rival submissions made by learned counsel

for the parties.

HARJEET KAUR

2025.12.19 17:28

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

##PAGE3##

CRM-M-59619-2025 (O&M) -3-

6. The petitioner along with the co-accused is alleged to have been

found in conscious possession of commercial quantity of contraband. Rigors

of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are therefore applicable in this case. As per

his custody certificate, he is in custody since 18.04.2024 i.e. for a period of

01 year and 08 months. Co-accused Parveen Kumar and Hardeep Singh,

whose case is on similar footings have been extended benefit of bail. Ever

since the withdrawal of his previous petition, a period of more than 09

months has expired. The trial is obviously likely to take time as no

prosecution witness has been examined so far. Hon’ble Supreme Court in

Rabi Prakash vs. State of Odisha : 2023 Live Law (SC) 533 has held that

the prolonged incarceration, generally militates against the most precious

fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution and in

such a situation, the conditional liberty must override the statutory embargo

created under Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of the NDPS Act. Similar view has been

taken by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Ankur Chaudhary vs. State of

Madhya Pradesh : 2024 (4) RCR (Criminal) 172. Reliance can also be

placed upon Mohd. Muslim @ Hussain vs. State (NCT of Delhi) : 2023

AIR(SC) 1648 2023 AIR(SC) 1648, wherein Hon’ble Supreme Court, while

granting concession of regular bail to an accused, from whom commercial

quantity of the contraband was allegedly recovered, has held that grant of

bail on the ground of undue delay in trial cannot be said to be fettered by

Section 37 of the NDPS Act. Reference can also be made to the authority

cited as Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and

another, 2022(10) SCC 51, wherein similar observations were made by the

Hon’ble Supreme Court. Reliance can also be placed upon the authority

HARJEET KAUR

2025.12.19 17:28

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

##PAGE4##

CRM-M-59619-2025 (O&M) -4-

cited as Bhupender Singh vs. Narcotic Control Bureau : (2022) 2 RCR

(Criminal) 706, wherein a Division Bench of this Court, after considering

issue with respect to achieving balance between right to speedy trial

guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the rigors

enumerated under Section 37 of t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top