Surinder Kaur Alias Anjali Vs State of Punjab

The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 483 of BNSS with a prayer to grant regular bail to her in case FIR No.121 dated 28.11.2022, registered under Sections 22 of NDPS Act 1985, Police Station Bhadson, District Patiala.

¶17

As per prosecution version, on the basis of the secret information, the petitioner was apprehended by the police party at the spot and 510 intoxicant capsules (weighing 270 grams) were recovered from her conscious possession on 28.11.2022, which is marginally above commercial quantity.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely involved in the present case and no recovery was effected from him. The petitioner is in custody since 28.11.2022 and the final report under

¶19

VIPIN KUMAR 2025.07.08 18:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this judgment/order

¶20

CRM-M-14669-2025

¶21

-2-

¶22

Section 173 Cr.P.C. has already been presented against her. He further contends that the prosecution has relied upon 12 witnesses, but 03 witnesses have been examined so far and the trial is likely to take long time. No useful purpose will be served by further detention of the petitioner in custody. Thus, it is prayed that she may be released on regular bail. In support of his contentions, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon judgments in (i) CRM-M-376842021, Balwinder Singh vs. State of Punjab , decided on 14.02.2022; (ii) CRM-M-8212-2022, Tajinder Singh vs. State of Punjab , decided on 03.03.2022 and (iii) CRM-M-35186-2016, Manjit Kaur @ Jeeto vs. State of Punjab , decided on 01.12.2016.

¶23

On the other hand, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that serious allegations have been levelled against the present petitioner and she does not deserve the concession of bail by this Court.

¶24

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, custody period of the petitioner and also the fact that the quantity of alleged contraband is marginally above the ‘commercial quantity’, but without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the considered view that the petitioner deserves the concession of regular bail.

¶25

Without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail pending trial on her furnishing bail bonds and surety to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court/ Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate subject to the following conditions:-

¶26

(i) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the

¶27

VIPIN KUMAR 2025.07.08 18:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this judgment/order

¶28

CRM-M-14669-2025

¶29

-3-

¶30

facts of the case, so as to dissuade her to disclose such facts to the Court or to any other authority.

¶31

(ii) The petitioner shall remain present before the Court on the dates fixed for hearing of the case.

¶32

(iii) The petitioner shall not absent herself from the Court proceedings except on the prior permission of the Court concerned.

¶33

(iv) The petitioner shall surrender her passport, if any, (if already not surrendered), and in case she is not holder of the same, she shall swear an affidavit to that effect.

¶34

(v) The petitioner shall also file her affidavit before the concerned Court, mentioning her ordinary place of residence and number of mobile phone, which shall be used by her during the pendency of the trial. In case of change of place of residence/mobile number, he shall share the details with the concerned Court/learned Trial Court.

¶35

(vi) In case, the petitioner is involved in any other criminal activity, during the pendency of the trial, it shall be viewed seriously.

¶36

(vii) The concerned Court may insist on two heavy local sureties and may also impose any other condition, in accordance with law, while accepting the bails bonds and surety bonds of the petitioner. (viii) The petitioner shall report every 1^st Monday in English calander month before the concerned SHO till the conclusion of the trial and SHO shall mark his presence by making an entry in the Rojnamcha. In case, he does not report on every 1^st Monday before the concerned SHO, it shall be viewed seriously and the concession granted to him shall be liable to be cancelled and the State of Punjab shall be at liberty to move an appropriate application in this regard.

¶37