Dismissed¶37

Sahib Singh v. Narcotic Control Bureau, Chandigarh

Anticipatory bail – NDPS Act

Punjab & Haryana HC17 Jul 2026CRM-M/3120/2026

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail refused; Punjab and Haryana High Court; CRM-M-3120-2026; H.S. Grewal, J.; Section 482 BNSS 2023 / Section 438 CrPC; NDPS Act Sections 8, 22, 29, 60; Section 37 NDPS rigours; commercial quantity of psychotropic substances; Tramadol and Alprazolam tablets; NCB Chandigarh FIR 24/2025; custodial interrogation; co-accused disclosure statements; dismissed.

What did the court decide?

At this stage it cannot be said that the petitioner has been implicated only on the basis of the disclosure statements of the co-accused; the prosecution has also relied upon the alleged diversion of the consignment and the recoveries made during the investigation. ¶30

Sahib Singh Vs Narcotic Control Bureau, Chandigarh — Narcotics (NDPS) | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶37

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner Sahib Singh is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS, 2023 (corresponding to Section 438 Cr.P.C.) in Crime No. 24/2025 registered under Sections 8, 22, 29 and 60 of the NDPS Act at NCB, Chandigarh. +1 more

¶13

Court's answer

¶30

Ratio / Principle

Subsequent recoveries (240 Tramadol capsules/tablets from the petitioner's residence and 42,720 Tramadol tablets with 19,800 Alprazolam tablets from a connected place) and other material collected during investigation prima facie connect the petitioner with the alleged offence.

¶31

Key takeaways

Having regard to the nature of the allegations and the material collected so far, effective investigation may require custodial interrogation of the petitioner to ascertain the source of procurement, identify network members, trace financial transactions and recover electronic evidence.ratio¶32
Since the case involves a commercial quantity of psychotropic substances, the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act apply, and the Court is not in a position to record the satisfaction required under that provision that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the petitioner is not guilty or not likely to commit any offence while on bail.ratio¶35

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail — NDPS Act — Petition under Section 482 BNSS, 2023 (corresponding to Section 438 Cr.P.C.) in Crime No. 24/2025, NCB Chandigarh, under Sections 8, 22, 29 and 60 NDPS Act, 1985 — recovery of 4,95,800 Tramadol tablets from intercepted truck; 240 Tramadol capsules from petitioner's residence; 42,720 Tramadol and 19,800 Alprazolam tablets from a linked warehouse — petitioner surfaced as intended recipient of diverted consignment — implication not solely on co-accused disclosure statements; recoveries and diversion material prima facie connect petitioner — commercial quantity attracts rigours of Section 37 NDPS Act; Court unable to record the statutory satisfaction — investigation at crucial stage, custodial interrogation required — petition dismissed; observations clarified not to bear on merits.

¶1

CRM-M-3120-2026 -1-

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

201 CRM-M-3120-2026 Date of decision : 17.07.2026

SAHIB SINGH

... PETITIONER

Versus

NCB, CHANDIGARH

.. RESPONDENTS

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL

¶10

Present:Mr. B.S. Bhalla, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. H.S. Sullar, Advocate for the respondent/NCB.

¶11

¶12

H.S. Grewal, J.(Oral)

¶13

The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 (corresponding to Section 438 Cr.P.C.) seeking grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case Crime No. 24/2025 dated 19.11.2025, registered under Sections 8, 22, 29 and 60 of the NDPS, 1985, at Narcotic Control Bureau, Chandigarh, Place of swizer Pehalwan Dhaba, Aerocity Road, opposite Green Lotus Utsav, Zirakpur (Annexure P-1).

¶14

The case of the prosecution is that on 19.11.2025, after receiving a secret information, the officials of the respondent/NCB intercepted a truck bearing No.UP-11-AT-1031 near Zirakpur. During the search, the recovery of 4,95,800 tablets of Tramadol Hydrochloride (NRx Clovedol-100 SR) along with other medicines, which were being transported without any valid invoice, e-way bill or mandatory drug licence was effected. It is alleged that the

¶15

SONIA GUGNANI 2026.07.23 13.59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶16

CRM-M-3120-2026 -2-

¶17

consignment was being transported illegally and the co-accused Haseen, Vishal Chaudhary, Naveen Kumar Chaudhary, Sahil @ Tajinder Singh, Suraj Bhatia, Monu Kumar, the truck driver and the courier operator were involved in the unlawful transportation and supply of the contraband. During the course of investigation, further raids were conducted at different locations and recovery of 240 capsules containing Tramadol was effected from the residence of the present petitioner, while another 42,720 Tramadol tablets and 19,800 Alprazolam tablets were allegedly recovered from a warehouse linked to the illegal network. It is further alleged that Vishal Chaudhary, owner of Eraya Pharma Pvt. Ltd., played a role in the illegal procurement, diversion and transportation of psychotropic medicines. His statement recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act allegedly disclosed that the seized consignment had been diverted to unauthorised persons and was intended to be delivered to different recipients through a network operating across several States. The role attributed to the petitioner is that he was one of the recipients of the diverted consignments.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and has no connection whatsoever with the alleged illegal consignment or the warehouse from which the bulk quantity of Tramadol tablets was recovered. It is submitted that the petitioner has been arraigned as an accused on the basis of disclosure statement of coaccused(s) Sahil and Suraj Bhatia and there is no independent material connecting the petitioner with the alleged offence. It is further submitted that

¶19

SONIA GUGNANI 2026.07.23 13.59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶20

CRM-M-3120-2026 -3-

¶21

the petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation and cooperate with the investigating agency as and when required.

¶22

Per contra , Learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent/NCB opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that the petitioner is actively involved in an organised network engaged in the illegal procurement, diversion and trafficking of psychotropic medicines pertains to commercial quantity of psychotropic substances. It is submitted that it has come during investigation that the seized psychotropic substances were intended to be supplied to the present petitioner, Sahib Singh, and his son Sumit Singh at Amritsar. It is further argued that after the seizure, the statement of co-accused Haseen was recorded, wherein he disclosed that he had been driving the truck carrying the contraband for several months and that the seized consignment had been sent by one Afridi from Saharanpur for delivery to the petitioner and his son. He also disclosed that he had delivered similar consignments to the petitioner about ten to twelve days prior to the present recovery. Pursuant to the said disclosure, the NCB conducted a search at the residence of the petitioner at Amritsar where 240 NRx Tramadol capsules/tablets were recovered. During the search, one Smt. Jagpreet Kaur confirmed that the premises belonged to the petitioner. Learned counsel further submits that co-accused Sahil @ Tajinder Singh, after his arrest, also made a voluntary statement admitting that he had participated in the illegal supply of Tramadol to the petitioner and his son. Learned counsel further submits that during the course of further investigation, another search operation was conducted, which resulted in the recovery of 42,720 Tramadol tablets and

¶23

SONIA GUGNANI 2026.07.23 13.59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶24

CRM-M-3120-2026 -4-

¶25

19,800 Alprazolam tablets allegedly concealed by the petitioner and his son. It is further submitted that these recoveries clearly establish the active involvement of the petitioner in the illegal possession and distribution of psychotropic substances. Learned counsel also submits that the investigation is still at a crucial stage and the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required to unearth the entire drug trafficking network. It is also submitted that his interrogation is necessary to identify the complete supply chain, trace the proceeds of crime and financial transactions etc. to ascertain the extent of illegal diversion of psychotropic medicines and identify other persons involved in the racket. Learned counsel also submits that the petitioner is already involved in another case under the NDPS Act relating to recovery of commercial quantity of narcotic tablets registered at Police Station City Khanna, in which he is presently on bail and he does not possess any valid licence to possess, purchase or sell psychotropic medicines. It is, therefore, prayed that the present petition be dismissed.

¶26

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record with their able assistance.

¶27

The allegations against the petitioner relate to the illegal procurement, diversion and trafficking of a commercial quantity of psychotropic substances. According to the prosecution, the consignment was originally meant for Dehradun, but it was diverted from Roorkee towards Amritsar before it could reach its destination. The vehicle was intercepted at Zirakpur and the diverted consignment was intended to be delivered to the petitioner and his son. Therefore, at this stage, it cannot be said that the

¶28

SONIA GUGNANI 2026.07.23 13.59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶29

CRM-M-3120-2026 -5-

¶30

petitioner has been implicated only on the basis of the disclosure statements of the co-accused. The prosecution has also relied upon the alleged diversion of the consignment and the recoveries made during the investigation.

¶31

Furthermore, a huge quantity of 4,95,800 Tramadol tablets was recovered from the intercepted truck. During the investigation, the petitioner surfaced as one of the intended recipients of the said consignment. It is also the case of the prosecution that 240 Tramadol capsules/tablets were recovered from the petitioner's residence and, thereafter, another recovery of 42,720 Tramadol tablets along with 19,800 Alprazolam tablets was effected from a place allegedly connected with the petitioner. The prosecution has relied upon subsequent recoveries and other material collected during the course of investigation, which prima facie connects the petitioner with the alleged offence.

¶32

It is also not in dispute that the investigation is still at a crucial stage. The respondent has specifically stated that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary to ascertain the source of procurement of the psychotropic substances, identify other members of the alleged network, trace the financial transactions, recover electronic evidence including mobile phones to unearth the entire conspiracy. Having regard to the nature of the allegations and the material collected so far, this Court finds substance in the submission that effective investigation may require custodial interrogation of the petitioner.

¶33

Another significant circumstance is that the present case involves a commercial quantity of psychotropic substances. Consequently, the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act become applicable. At this stage, this Court is not SONIA GUGNANI 2026.07.23 13.59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶34

CRM-M-3120-2026 -6-

¶35

in a position to record the satisfaction required under the said provision that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the petitioner is not guilty of the alleged offence or that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. It has also been brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioner is facing another prosecution under the NDPS Act involving recovery of a commercial quantity, though he is stated to be on bail.

¶36

Keeping in view the seriousness of the allegations, the huge quantity of psychotropic substances allegedly involved, the recoveries attributed to the petitioner during investigation and the stage of investigation, this Court is not inclined to exercise the extraordinary discretionary jurisdiction for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶37

Consequently, the petition is dismissed.

¶38

However, it is clarified that the observations made hereinabove

¶39

would not have any bearing on the merits of the case.

¶40

(H.S.GREWAL) July 17, 2026 JUDGE Sonia Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

¶41

SONIA GUGNANI 2026.07.23 13.59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

Sahib Singh v. Narcotic Control Bureau, Chandigarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sahib Singh v. Narcotic Control Bureau, Chandigarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanjeev Kumar Vs Emanial Salhotra

Amit Kumr Vs State of Punjab and Another

Nalima Warraich Alias Nalima Wraich Vs State of Punjab and Another

Boota Singh Vs State of Punjab

Monu Kumar Vs Union of India through Narcotics Control Bureau, Chandigarh Zonal Unit Sas Nagar Mohali

Afridi Vs Narcotic Control Bureau,Chd