finding on the merits of the case. The plea of the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated and that the recovery has been planted upon him is essentially a matter of defence. It is true that the investigation has been completed and challan has been presented and the petitioner has remained in custody since 17.03.2025. However, these factors by themselves cannot outweigh the statutory restrictions contained in Section 37 of the NDPS Act, particularly when the alleged recovery is of commercial quantity. No material has been brought on record at this stage to satisfy this Court that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the petitioner is not guilty of the alleged offence. There is also no sufficient basis to conclude that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. Keeping in view the gravity of the allegations levelled against the petitioner, his criminal antecedents, the quantum of sentence which the conviction may entail and the attendant facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner does not deserve to be granted benefit of regular bail, at this stage. Hence, the petition is dismissed.
