IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

215 CRM-M-24004-2025 (O&M)

Date of decision : 16.02.2026 Shamsher Singh @Shera ..... Petitioner VERSUS State of Punjab ..... Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA PARTAP SINGH Present : Mr. Gagandeep Singh Bajwa, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Rohit Bansal, Sr. DAG Punjab.

*****

SURYA PARTAP SINGH, J.

This is first petition for bail filed by the petitioner with regard to a case arising out of FIR No.101 dated 13.12.2023 under Sections 21(C), and 29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, hereinafter being referred to as ‘NDPS Act’ only, Police Station Sarai Amant Khan, District Tarn Taran. The abovementioned FIR came into being when a team of police official led by ‘SI Charanjit Singh’ was deputed for patrolling duty and during the discharge of abovementioned duty, on the basis of suspicion a motorcycle bearing registration No.PB02-EN-2722, carrying two persons, was intercepted and from the possession of occupants of abovementioned motorcycle, 2.80 kg of Heroin was recovered from the possession of petitioner and 2.22 kg of Heroin from Yadwinder Singh @Yaad.

2. It is the case of the prosecution that on recovery of abovementioned contraband, necessary formalities with regard to seizure &

sealing of contraband, lodging of FIR, and formal arrest of the accused were performed, and further investigation taken up.

3. Notice of motion

4. Mr. Rohit Bansal, Sr. DAG Punjab appears on behalf of respondent-State. Hence service of notice upon the State is hereby dispensed with. The learned State Counsel has filed custody certificate of the petitioner. The same be taken on record. Short reply has already been placed on record.

5. Heard.

6. The record has been perused carefully.

7. As far as the principles governing the benefit of bail in a case related to NDPS Act, pertaining to recovery of commercial quantity, are concerned, the principles of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ‘Mohd. Muslim @ Hussain v. State’ (NCT of Delhi), 2023 SCC OnLine SC 352 are relevant, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that grant of bail on account of undue delay in trial cannot be said to be fettered under Section-37 of the NDPS Act, given the imperative of Section

436-A which is applicable to offences under the Act.

8. In this regard it is also relevant to mention here that the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of ‘Manmandal and Another v. State of West Bengal’, Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No.8656 of 2023 decided on 14.09.2023 and ‘Rabi Prakash v. State of Odisha’, 2023 SCC Online SC 1109, extended the benefit of bail to the accused, who had been incarcerated for a period of almost 2-3 years and the trial was likely to take considerable time. The above-mentioned benefit has been given by observing that prolonged incarceration generally militates against the most precious fundamental right guaranteed under Article-21 of the Constitution, and in such a situation, the constitutional principles must override the statutory embargo contained under Section-37 of the NDPS Act.

9. In addition to above, in a recently pronounced verdict in the case of ‘Santosh Pawar Vs. State of Chhattishgarh & Anr.’ Criminal Appeal No.4883/2025, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India observed that rigors of Section 37 of NDPS Act will not be a bar for considering the case of an accused for bail as it comes with a condition that the prosecution would press for an early completion of trial. In the above-mentioned case the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India held that appellant who was being prosecuted for being in possession of commercial quantity of narcotic substance, was entitled for bail in view of her incarceration for a period of

19 months.

10. Similarly in another case i.e. in the case of ‘Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation’ (2022) 10 SCC 51 prolonged incarceration and inordinate delay engaged the attention of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, which considered the corre