IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:18.05.2026 KULDEEP RAM @ KEBA .....PETITIONER Vs.

STATE OF PUNJAB .....RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ Present:- Ms. Renu Arora, Advocate for the petitioner.

(Through Video Conferencing).

Mr. Raj Karan Singh, AAG, Punjab.

****

RAJESH BHARDWAJ , J.

1. The present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanita, 2023 seeking grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No. 29 dated 04.03.2025, under Sections 22-C/61/85 NDPS Act, registered at Police Station Sadar Nakodar, Jalandhar Rural (Annexure P-1).

2. Succinctly the facts of the case are that the present FIR was registered at the instance of ASI Major Singh on the allegations that on 04.03.2025, while on patrolling, they saw a young person coming on foot, who on seeing the police party became perplexed and threw away a polythene bag after taking it out from the pocket of his jacket. On the basis of suspicion, he was apprehended. On interrogation, he disclosed his name as Kuldeep Ram alias Keba, (present petitioner). On suspicion, search of polythene bag thrown by him was conducted and 52 light orange coloured loose intoxicant tablets were recovered. He could not produce any license for keeping in possession the intoxicant tablets. Thus, FIR got registered and he was arrested on the spot. The investigation commenced. The petitioner approached the Court of learned Judge, Special Court, Jalandhar, praying for the grant of bail. After hearing both the sides, since the report from the chemical examiner was not received, the petitioner was granted interim bail vide order dated 17.04.2025. Thereafter the interim bail granted to the petitioner was canceled and he was again arrested on 21.05.2025. Hence the petitioner is before this Court by way of filing the present petition praying for the grant of regular bail.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that as per the case of prosecution, the alleged recovery has been effected from the concocted place. It is alleged that one envelope was thrown by the petitioner and from the same 52 narcotic tablets were recovered. She submits that there is a blatent violation of provision of Section 50 of NDPS Act and no conscious possession has been proved. She submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in three other cases and it is on account of the sake under the ‘Yudh Nasheya Virudh’, he has been falsely implicated in the present case and the recovery of 52 tablets has been planted upon the petitioner. She submits that the petitioner is on bail in other cases. She thus, submits that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner deserves to be granted bail.

4. Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner and submits that the petitioner was arrested on the spot and from envelope having been thrown by him, 52 tablets were recovered and as per the FSL report the same were found to be containing 5.4 grams of Etizolam, which is commercial quantity and thus the provisions of Section 37 of NDPS Act are attracted. He, on instructions, has submitted that out of total 12 prosecution witnesses, only one witness has been examined so far. He has produced the custody certificate of the petitioner on record.

5. After hearing counsel for the parties and perusing the record, the alleged recovery is from a public place. Violation of provisions of Section 50 of NDPS Act, is vehemently contended. As per custody certificate, the petitioner has suffered an incarceration of 01 year and 01 months and 12 days as on 17.05.2026. It further reflects that the petitioner has involved in three other cases, however, in one case, he is on bail and as per the FSL report Etizolam weighing 5.4 grams was found in the 52 tablets recovered. The quantity above 2.5 grams is commerc