IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

213 CRM-M-40089-2025 Date of decision: 08.01.2026 DINESH ....Petitioner Versus STATE OF HARYANA ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR Present : Mr. Himmat Singh Deol, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Jasmine Gill, AAG, Haryana.

*******

YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR. J.(Oral)

1. Present petition under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been filed for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.114 dated 23.04.2024, under Section 21(C) of NDPS Act, registered at Police Station Khol, District Rewari.

2. Status report by way of an affidavit of Pawan Kumar, HPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Traffic, District Rewari filed on behalf of the State is taken on record.

3. Brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 23.04.2024, Inspector Prehlad Singh along with other police officials was on patrolling duty, when he received a secret information that Dinesh @ Mota (petitioner) and Ghanshyam were engaged in the business of selling heroin and in case a naka is laid, huge quantity of heroin can be recovered. Thereafter, a naka was laid and after some time, a white coloured car came there and on seeing the police party, the accused persons tried to flee from there but they were apprehended by the police party. On asking, accused persons disclosed their names as Dinesh @ Mota and Ghanshyam. Upon search, 282.11 grams of heroin from Dinesh @ Mota (petitioner) was recovered. The contraband was taken into possession. Petitioner along with co-accused was arrested and after completion of investigation, challan has been presented against the accused for trial.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated. Learned counsel next contended that the petitioner is in custody since 23.04.2024 and after completion of investigation, challan has been presented. However, the case is still at the stage of prosecution evidence and trial has not been concluded and conclusion of the trial is likely to take a long time. Learned counsel further contended that in view of his long incarceration, petitioner is entitled to be released on bail, as prolonged incarceration, generally militates against the most precious fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution and the conditional liberty must override the statutory embargo created under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon judgments passed in CRM-M-21794 of 2023 – Sandeep Singh v. State of Punjab decided on 05.05.2023, CRR-1785 of 2018 (O&M)- Vicky Kaur v. State of Punjab, decided on 13.08.2018, CRM-M- 14029 of 2018 Kamlesh v. State of Punjab, decided on 06.05.2015, CRM-M- 17321 of 2025 Jassu Ram @ Jasuram v. State of Punjab, decided on 04.04.2025 and a judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. (s).12788/2023 – Nandalal Mondal @ Abhay Mondal v. The State of West Bengal, judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court passed in Criminal Appeal No.4883/2025 - Santosh Pawar Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Anr. decided on 14.11.2025 and (2022) 10 SCC 52, Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation

6. On the other hand, learned State Counsel has opposed the bail and argued that the petitioner has committed a heinous crime as he was found in possession of 282.11 grams of heroin. In view of rigors contained in statutory provision of Section 37 of NDPS Act and his past conduct as he is involved in 06 more cases, he is not entitled to be released on bail.

7. Hon’ble Supreme Court in 2023 Live Law (SC) 533, Rabi Prakash v. State of Odisha has held that 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 und