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

2025 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 24838

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
RAJPAL KAUR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB – Respondent



260 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.73939 of 2025 Date of Decision: 14.01.2026 Rajpal Kaur ..... Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ..... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ ***

Present: Mr. Kamil Nagpal, Advocate and Mr. Rajat Mehmi, Advocate for the petitioner.

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

***

RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J. (ORAL)

1. Present third petition has been filed praying for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.188, dated 06.12.2024, under Sections 21 of NDPS Act (Section 29 of NDPS Act added later on), registered at Police Station City Special Task Force, District Phase-4, Mohali.

2. Succinctly the facts of the case are that the police party, while on patrolling on 06.12.2024, received a secret information to the effect that Rajpal Kaur was involved in selling of heroin and she was standing on the road going from village Kot Karor Khurd, P.S. Talwandi Bhai, District Ferozepur to village Darapur, Bathinda for supplying the heroin to her customers and in case of raid, she could be apprehended along with the contraband. On receiving the secret information, the raiding party was constituted and reached the place, as disclosed in the secret information. The woman, as resembled in the secret information was seen standing. She was carrying a bag with her. On asking, she disclosed her name to be Rajpal Kaur. She was suspected to be carrying some contraband in the bag being carried by her and thus, the same was searched. On conducting the search of the bag, 265 grams of heroin was recovered. She failed to produce any licence regarding the conscious possession of the same, thus, the FIR was registered and she was arrested on the spot. On registration of the FIR, the investigation commenced. The samples taken were sent to the FSL. On completion of the investigation, the challan was presented and on framing of charges, the trial commenced. The petitioner approached the Court of learned Judge, Special Court, Ferozepur praying for the grant of bail, however after hearing both the sides and finding no merit in the same, the learned Judge, Special Court, Ferozepur declined the bail application filed by the petitioner vide order dated 23.01.2025. Being aggrieved, the petitioner earlier approached this Court twice praying for the grant of bail by way of filing CRM-M-16493-2025 and CRM-M- 33712-2025, however the same were dismissed vide orders dated 12.05.2025 and 07.07.2025, respectively. Hence being aggrieved, the petitioner is again before this Court by way of filing the present third petition praying for the grant of regular bail.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has submitted that the alleged recovery effected in the present case from the public place, however no independent witness has been joined. He has submitted that the case of prosecution is based on the secret information but there is a violation of mandatory provisions of Section 42 of NDPS Act. He has submitted that there is a violation of mandatory provisions of Section 50 of NDPS act as well in conducting the search. He has submitted that the quantity above 250 grams of heroin is commercial in nature whereas the alleged recovery effected from the petitioner is 265 grams of heroin only. To buttress his arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents as she has never been involved in any other case. She has submitted that the petitioner is behind bars since 06.12.2024, however there is no progress in the trial. He has submitted that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner deserves to be granted bail.

4. Learned counsel for the State has vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. He has submitted that the petitioner was specifically named in the secret information. He has submitted that the contraba

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top