IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Divya ... Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ... Respondent

1. The date when the judgment is reserved 11.05.2026 2. The date when the judgment is pronounced 13.05.2026 3. The date when the judgment is uploaded on the 13.05.2026 website

4. Whether only operative part of the judgment is Full pronounced or whether the full judgment is pronounced

5. The delay, if any, of the pronouncement of full Not applicable judgment, and reasons thereof CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present: Mr. Brijesh Singh Ladwal, Advocate and Mr. Gaurav G.S. Chauhan, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Neeraj Poswal, AAG, Haryana, for the respondent-State.

***

MANISHA BATRA , J.

1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNSS”) seeking regular bail in the FIR mentioned below:-

FIR No. Dated Police Station Sections

0181 13.12.2025 Sector-9, Ambala20 of Narcotic Drugs and City, DistrictPsychotropic Substances Ambala Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’) (29 of NDPS Act added later on)

2. Brief facts relevant for the purpose of disposal of this petition are that the aforementioned FIR was registered on the allegations that on 13.12.2025, a secret information was received to the effect that the present petitioner Divya who originally hailed from Himachal Pradesh and then residing in Ambala City, was engaged in the business of sale of narcotic substance from home and at that time also, she was having huge quantity of narcotic substance. Believing the secret information to be true, a raiding party was immediately formed which conducted raid at the house of the petitioner and recovered 01 Kg and 635 grams of charas found stored in a wooden almirah. The recovered contraband was taken into possession. The petitioner was formally arrested. An amount of Rs.11,500/- was also recovered from her. On interrogation, she suffered disclosure statement to the effect that she along with her live-in-partner Kuldeep Kumar @ Goldy was engaged in the business of procuring charas from accused Balbir Singh @ Ballu and selling the same to drug addicts in Ambala at higher rates. Accused Balbir Singh was arrested on 15.12.2025 whereas the accused Kuldeep Kumar was arrested on 11.03.2026. Investigation now stands concluded.

3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that she has been falsely implicated in this case. A false recovery has been planted upon her. She had been residing in live-in-relationship with the co-accused Kuldeep Kumar. The wooden almirah from which the recovery had been effected, was not in her exclusive possession or control nor the same was locked by the petitioner. None of her personal belongings were found kept in the same and, therefore, recovery cannot be stated to be from her conscious possession. The family members of accused Kuldeep Kumar were residing on the ground floor of the same building and since they were having serious objections as to the relationship of the petitioner with the co-accused Kuldeep Kumar, therefore, the possibility of their getting her falsely implicated cannot be ruled out. She has been made a scapegoat due to domestic hostility and social opposition towards live-in-relationship. Her antecedents are clean. No useful purpose would be served by detaining her in custody any more. She is also HIV positive person. It is, thus argued that she deserves to be released on bail.

4. Per contra, learned Assistant Advocate General, Haryana has argued that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature. The rigors of Section 37 of NDPS Act are attracted in this case. The petitioner is an active participant in illegal trafficking of narcotic substance and is part of a well organized supply chain. There are chances of her absconding or committing similar offences, if extended benefit of bail. It is, therefore, argued that the petition does not deserve to be allowed.

5. This Court has cons