(235) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-6649-2026 (O & M) Date of Decision: 10.02.2026 Sahiljit Singh @ Sahil ... Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI Present: Mr. B.S. Jaswal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. M.S. Toor, AAG, Punjab.

****

JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J.

The prayer in this second petition under Section 483 of BNSS is for the grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No.02 dated 02.01.2025 under Sections 21-C/25/29 of the NDPS Act, 1985 registered at Police Station STF, Distt. SAS Nagar, Mohali.

2. The brief facts of the case are that Sahiljit Singh @ Sahil (petitioner) and Harjit Singh were apprehended with 510 grams of heroin.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. The allegations levelled against him are baseless. There is a violation of mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act regarding search and seizure including Section 42 and Section 50. As the petitioner is in custody since 02.01.2025 but none of the 18 prosecution witnesses has been examined so far and the Trial of the case is not likely to be concluded anytime soon. Therefore, he is entitled to the concession of bail.

4. The learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, contends that commercial quantity of contraband has been recovered from the petitioner and his co-accused. The grounds raised by the petitioner are to be examined during the course of the Trial and cannot be adjudicated upon at this stage. The petitioner is unable to satisfy the requirements under Section 37 of the NDPS Act that he has not committed the offence in question and is not likely to commit one in future. The first bail application of the petitioner was argued and withdrawn on 18.11.2025. No significant change in circumstances have been been pointed out entitling the petitioner to the grant of bail. Therefore, the present petition is liable to be dismissed.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

6. As per the case of the prosecution, the recovery of commercial quantity of contraband has been effected from the petitioner and his co- accused. This Court, at this stage, cannot record a prima facie satisfaction under Section 37 of the NDPS Act that the petitioner has not committed the offence in question and is not likely to commit one in future. Further, the first bail application of the petitioner was withdrawn as recently as on 18.11.2025. The instant petition has been filed without any significant change in circumstances. Therefore, I am not inclined to granted the concession of bail to the petitioner.

7. In view of the above, I find no merit in the present petition and the same stands dismissed.

8. The pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly.

(JASJIT SINGH BEDI)

JUDGE

10.02.2026 sukhpreet Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable:- Yes/No