IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

217 CRM-M-12275-2026 (O&M)

Date of decision : 27.03.2026 Rekha @Rekha Rani ..... Petitioner VERSUS State of Punjab ..... Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA PARTAP SINGH Present : Mr. Zorawar S. Chauhan, Advocate and Mr. Shreya Bublani, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. I.P.S. Sabharwal, DAG, Punjab.

*****

SURYA PARTAP SINGH, J.

This petition for bail is the second petition filed by the petitioner under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. It has been filed with regard to a case arising out of FIR No.236 dated 28.08.2024, for the commission of offence punishable under Section 20 (C) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, [Section 29, Section 317(2) BNS, 2023/Section 411 added later on] Police Station Phillaur, District Jalandhar.

2. The FIR of this case came into being at the instance of ‘ASI Daljit Singh’ who had reported that on 28.08.2024, when he was leading a team of police officials, deputed for patrolling duty, he spotted three persons riding on a motorcycle. According to abovenamed police official, when the abovementioned motorcycle was intercepted and the search of the bodies of the occupants of the abovementioned motorcycle was conducted, from the possession of accused Rekha (the petitioner herein) 1.50 kg of charas was recovered.

3. It is the case of the prosecution that pursuant to abovementioned recovery, requisite formalities with regard to seizure and sealing of contraband, filing of FIR and formal arrest of the accused was taken up.

4. The learned State Counsel has filed custody certificate of the petitioner. The same be taken on record. No formal reply has been filed by the State. However, the learned State Counsel has orally opposed the present petition.

5. Heard.

6. Since the quantity of recovered contraband in the present case comes within the ambit of commercial quantity, the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of ‘Mohd. Muslim @ Hussain v. State’ (NCT of Delhi), 2023 SCC OnLine SC 352 are relevant. In the abovementioned case 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.

7. 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.

8. 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.

9. 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