Ajaib Singh Vs State of Punjab — Narcotics (NDPS) | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

Ajaib Singh Vs State of Punjab — Narcotics (NDPS) | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petitioner ordered to be released on regular bail, subject to furnishing personal/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned; it remains open to the prosecution to apply for cancellation of bail if the petitioner is found involved in any other subsequent case.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, apprehended on 12.02.2021 with recovery of 55 kgs. of poppy husk (commercial quantity engaging the rigors of Section 37 NDPS Act) and incarcerated for more than three and a half years amid a substantially delayed trial, is entitled to regular bail.

Court's answer

In view of the substantially delayed trial and the petitioner's prolonged incarceration of more than three and a half years, and keeping in view the ratio of law laid down in the aforecited authorities (including that prolonged incarceration militates against Article 21 and that conditional liberty must override the statutory embargo under Section 37(1)(b)(ii) NDPS Act), this Court held that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody anymore; accordingly the petition seeking regular bail was allowed despite the commercial-quantity recovery.

Key takeaways

Any observations made in the judgment are only for the purpose of deciding the present petition and shall have no bearing on the merits of the case.obiter¶7

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab & Haryana High Court (Manisha Batra, J., oral; decision 16.05.2025) allowed CRM-M-15373-2025, a third regular-bail petition under Section 483 BNSS 2023 filed by Ajaib Singh, accused in FIR No. 19 dated 12.02.2021, PS Sirhind, District Fatehgarh Sahib, under Section 15 NDPS Act, 1985 (55 kgs. poppy husk recovered from petitioner and co-accused Harchand Singh @ Billa on 12.02.2021). Although commercial-quantity recovery attracted the statutory embargo of Section 37(1)(b)(ii) NDPS Act urged by the State, bail was granted because the trial (challan presented 01.07.2021; still at prosecution-evidence stage; 05 prosecution witnesses remaining) is substantially delayed with no likelihood of early conclusion, and the petitioner has suffered prolonged incarceration of over three and a half years since 12.02.2021 (barring interim-bail periods), having undergone a two-month sentence in one similar case; earlier bail pleas CRM-M-29324-2021 (dismissed as withdrawn 10.05.2022) and CRM-M-52025-2022 (dismissed 17.07.2024) noted. Reliance placed on Rabi Prakash (2023 Live Law (SC) 533), Ankur Chaudhary (2024 (4) RCR (Criminal) 172), Mohd. Muslim @ Hussain (2023 AIR(SC) 1648), Satender Kumar Antil (2022(10) SCC 51) and Bhupender Singh ((2022) 2 RCR (Criminal) 706): prolonged incarceration generally militates against the Article 21 right, and conditional liberty must override the Section 37 embargo where trial is unduly delayed. Release on personal/surety bonds; prosecution free to seek cancellation upon fresh involvement; observations confined to disposal of the petition, without bearing on merits.

CRM-M-15373-2025 (O&M)

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

234

CRM-M-15373-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 16.05.2025

Ajaib Singh ...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA

Present:Mr. Yashpal Thakur, Advoca t e for the petitioner.

Mr. Vivek Sharma, AAG, Pu n jab.

MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral)

The instant one is the third p etition, filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 20 2 3, for grant of regular bail t o the petitioner in FIR No. 19 dated 12.02.202 1 , registered under Section 15 o f the NDPS Ac t , 1985 at Police Station Sirhin d , District Fatehgarh Sahib. The first petition, b earing number CRM-M-29324 - 2021 was dismissed as withd r awn on 10.05. 2 022 and the second petition, bearing number CRM-M-52025-2 0 22, was dismi s sed on 17.07.2024.

As per the allegations, the p etitioner and co-accused Harc h and Singh @ Billa were apprehended by a police party on 12.02.2021 and recovery 5 5 kgs. of poppy husk was effec t ed from them. Now, they are facing trial befor e the learned trial Court.

Learned counsel for the peti t ioner has argued that the petiti o ner has been f alsely implicated in this case. T he trial is substantially delayed and its conclu s ion would still take a long tim e . The petitioner is in custody s ince

MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.05.21 17:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-15373-2025 (O&M)

-2-

12.02.202 1 barring period of interim ba i l. The prolonged incarceration has entitled t h e petitioner to seek bail. T h e petitioner had not misused the concessio n of interim bail. It is, therefore, urged that the petition deserv e s to be allowe d and the petitioner deserves to b e released on bail.

Status report has been fil e d by the respondent-State. I t is submitted therein and learned Assista n t Advocate General, Punjab has opposed t h e prayer made by the petitio n er on the ground that comme r cial quantity o f contraband was recovered f r om the petitioner and co-acc u sed. Hence, it is urged that the petition is liable to be dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsel f or the parties at considerable le n gth and have a lso gone through the record car e fully. 6. As per the allegations, t h e petitioner and above na co-accuse d were apprehended by the poli c e party on 12.02.2021 and reco v ery of 55 kgs . of poppy husk was effected f rom them. A perusal of the s t atus report rev e als that though the petitioner w as convicted in one more case of similar na t ure for two months but he ha s undergone the sentence. It is also reflected t hat the trial is still at the stage of recording the prosec u tion evidence, despite the fact that challan w a s presented on 01.07.2021 an d 05 prosecution witnesses are still remained t o be examined. The trial is obviously delayed a n d there is no likelihood of the s ame to conclude in near future. The petitioner is in prolonged incarceration o f more than three and half y e ars. Hon’ble S u preme Court in Rabi Prakash vs. State of Odisha : 2023 Live Law (SC) 533 h as held that the prolonged inca r ceration, generally militates ag a inst the most precious fundamental right g u aranteed under Article 21 o f the Constituti o n and in such a situation, the c onditional liberty must overrid e the

MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.05.21 17:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-15373-2025 (O&M)

-3-

statutory e mbargo created under Section 3 7 (1)(b)(ii) of the NDPS Act. Si m ilar view has been taken by Hon’ble Supre m e Court in Ankur Chaudhary vs. State of Madhya Pradesh : 2024 (4) RCR (Criminal) 172 . Reliance can also be placed upon Mohd. Muslim @ Hussain vs. State (NCT of Delhi) : 2023 AIR(SC) 1648 2023 AIR(SC) 1648 , whe r ein Hon’ble Supreme Court, w hile granting c oncession of regular bail to a n accused, from whom comme r cial quantity o f the contraband was allegedly r ecovered, has held that grant o f bail on the ground of undue delay in trial can n ot be said to be fettered by Se c tion 37 of the NDPS Act. Reference can als o be made to the authority cited as Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2022(10) SCC 51, wherein similar obse r vations were made by the Ho n ’ble Supreme C ourt. Reliance can also be p laced upon the authority cite d as Bhupender Singh vs. Narcotic Control Bureau : (2022) 2 RCR (Criminal) 706 , whe r ein a Division Bench of this C ourt, after considering issue w ith respect to achieving balance between rig h t to speedy trial guaranteed u n der Article 2 1 of the Constitution of India and the rigors enumerated u n der Section 3 7 of the NDPS Act, has held t h at convict/accused is not precl u ded from clai m ing bail invoking parameters o f Article 21 of the Constitution of India de-hors the stringent provisions of S ection 37 of the NDPS Act. I n the present c a se, apparently and evidently, the trial is substantially delayed. Therefore, keeping in view the aforeme n tioned facts and circumstances and also the r a tio of law as laid down in the a f orecited authorities, this Court i s of the considered opinion that no useful pur p ose would be served by keepin g the petitioner in custody anymore. Accordin g ly, the present petition is allo w ed. The petit i oner is ordered to be releas e d on regular bail, subject to his

MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.05.21 17:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-15373-2025 (O&M) -4-

furnishing personal/surety bonds to the s atisfaction of the trial Court/ D uty Magistrat e concerned. However, it will be open for the prosecution to a p ply for cancel l ation of bail in case the petiti o ner is found involved in any o ther subseque n t case.

It is made clear that any observation made herein above is o nly for the p u rpose of deciding the present p etition and the same shall hav e no bearing o n the merits of the case.

16.05.2025 (MANISHA BATRA) Waseem Ansari JUDGE

Whe t her speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whe t her reportable Yes/No

MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.05.21 17:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document