IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Reserved on: 01.10.2025 Pronounced on: 17.10.2025 Bikramjit Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present: Mr. Rishu Mahajan, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Jasdev Singh Thind, D.A.G., Punjab.

****

ANOOP CHITKARA, J.

FIR No. Dated Police Station Sections

10 04.02.2024 SSOC, District 21/29 of NDPS Act Amritsar

1. The petitioner incarcerated in the FIR captioned above had come up before this Court under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS], seeking regular bail.

2. Per paragraph 12 of the bail petition, the petitioner has no criminal antecedents.

3. The facts and allegations are taken from the status report filed by the State. On 04.02.2024, based on secret information, the Police seized 1 kg Heroin from possession of Major Singh. The Investigator claims to have complied with all the statutory requirements of the NDPS Act, 1985, and CrPC, 1973.

4. During the custodial interrogation of the accused Major Singh, he disclosed that he and petitioner used to receive consignment of Heroin being sent by Pakistani smugglers Billa and used to supply further to the parties as per directions of Billa; based on the disclosure statement, the police arraigned the petitioner as an accused by incorporating S. 29 of the NDPS Act.

5. The petitioner's counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent conditions and contends that further pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and their family.

6. The petitioner’s counsel submits that the petitioner would have no objection whatsoever to any stringent conditions that this Court may impose, including that if the petitioner repeats the offense or commits any non-bailable offense which provides for a sentence of imprisonment for more than seven years, or commits any offence under the NDPS Act, where the quantity involved is more than half of the intermediate, or commercial quantity, or violates S. 19, or 24, or 27-A of the NDPS Act, the State may file an application to revoke this bail before the concerned Court having jurisdiction over this FIR, which shall have the authority to cancel this bail, and may do so at their discretion, to which the petitioner shall have no objection.

7. The State’s counsel opposes bail and refers to the status report.

8. As per paragraph 13 of the status report, the contraband recovered from the main accused Major Singh was 1 kg of heroin and later on, on the disclosure statement of petitioner, 1.02 kg Heroin was recovered near border.

9. Dealing in 1.02 kg of heroin in contravention of the NDPS Act, 1985, constitutes an offense under the following provisions and notifications:

Small Quantity 5 Gram (i.e. equivalent to 0.005 Kg) Commercial Quantity > 250 Gram (i.e. equivalent to 0.25 Kg)

0

10. The quantity allegedly involved in this case is commercial. Given this, the rigors of S. 37 of the NDPS Act apply in the present case. The petitioner must satisfy the twin conditions put in place by the Legislature under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

11. It would be appropriate to refer to the evidence collected against the petitioner, which is taken from paragraphs 12 to 14 of status report, which reads as follows:

“THE ROLE OF THE PETITIONER

12. That it is submitted that the accused Bikramjit Singh is involved in smuggling of heroin from Pakistan. He used to receive consignments of heroin through drone from Pakistani smuggler Billa. The accused Bikramjit Singh was nominated on disclosure statement of co-accused Major Singh who was arrested with conscious possession of 01 Kg of heroin. After arrest of petitioner Bikramjit Singh, he corroborated the disclosures of co-accused Major Singh. As a consequence of disclosure Bikramjit Singh, he led the police party and pointed out place near India-Pakistan border from where 1.02 Kg. (2 packets of 510 gms each) were recovered.

THE EVIDENCE AGAINST THE PETITIONER

13. That it is submitted