Allowed¶29

Ajay Kumar Alias Mattu v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC17 Apr 2026CRM-M/6123/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail granted under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 to Ajay Kumar alias Mattu in NDPS case (Sections 21, 27-A) involving recovery of 5.84 grams heroin, non-commercial quantity, and Rs. 9,200/- alleged drug money (FIR No.364 dated 03.12.2025, P.S. Civil Line Batala); custody of 4 months 12 days, no prosecution witness examined, trial delay; Punjab and Haryana High Court, CRM-M-6123-2026, decided 17.04.2026 by H.S. Grewal, J.

What did the court decide?

Release on regular bail during the pendency of trial on furnishing requisite bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned, without expressing any opinion on merits; liberty reserved to the State/complainant/injured to seek cancellation of bail in case of misuse. ¶29

Ajay Kumar Alias Mattu Vs State of Punjab — Narcotics (NDPS) | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶29

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 (erstwhile Section 439 Cr.P.C.) in case FIR No.364 dated 03.12.2025 under Sections 21, 27-A of the NDPS Act. +1 more

¶17

Court's answer

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on furnishing requisite bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned.

¶29

Ratio / Principle

Regular bail granted during the pendency of trial because the petitioner has been in custody for more than 04 months and 12 days, the alleged recovery is of non-commercial quantity, and the trial is likely to take a long time as none of the prosecution witnesses has been examined; the continuous detention of the petitioner would not serve the ends of justice.

¶26

Key takeaways

In case the petitioner misuses the concession of bail, the State/complainant/injured would be at liberty to seek cancellation of his bail.ratio¶30

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab and Haryana High Court (H.S. Grewal, J.) — Regular bail under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 (erstwhile Section 439 Cr.P.C.) in FIR No.364 dated 03.12.2025, P.S. Civil Line Batala, under Sections 21, 27-A NDPS Act — recovery of 5.84 grams of heroin (non-commercial quantity) and Rs. 9,200/- alleged drug money — petitioner in custody for over 04 months and 12 days; no prosecution witness examined; trial likely to take long — plea of non-compliance of mandatory NDPS provisions (no independent witness) noted — held: continuous detention would not serve the ends of justice; regular bail granted during pendency of trial without expressing any opinion on merits; liberty to State/complainant/injured to seek cancellation in case of misuse of bail.

¶1

-1-

¶2

CRM-M-6123-2026

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

205

¶5

CRM-M-6123-2026

¶6

Date of decision : 17.04.2026

¶7

AJAY KUMAR ALIAS MATTU

... PETITIONER

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB

.. RESPONDENT

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

¶13

Present:Mr. Ritesh Pandey, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶14

Mr. Rohit Hans, DAG, Punjab.

¶15

¶16

H.S. Grewal, J.(Oral)

¶17

This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking regular bail under Section 483 BNSS, 2023(erstwhile Section 439 Cr.P.C.), in case FIR No.364 dated 03.12.2025, under Sections 21, 27-A of the NDPS Act, registered at Police Station Civil Line Batala, District Batala.

¶18

The case of the prosecution is that on 03.12.2025, the petitioner was apprehended on the basis of suspicion when he tried to throw a polythene pouch upon seeing the police party. Upon checking of the said polythene pouch, 5.84 grams of heroin (non-commercial quantity) was recovered and from the personal search of the petitioner, an amount of Rs. 9,200/- was also recovered which is alleged to be drug money.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and there is no incriminating

¶20

SONIA GUGNANI 2026.04.17 16.43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶21

CRM-M-6123-2026 -2-

¶22

material which would connect him with the alleged offence. It is submitted that there is non-compliance of mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act as no independent witness was joined during recovery. Learned counsel also submits that the petitioner is in custody for the last more than 04 months and 12 days. Although the petitioner is involved in four other cases including two cases under the NDPS Act but he is on bail in all the cases. He, therefore, prays for release of the petitioner on regular bail as the trial is likely to take a long time as none of the prosecution witness has been examined so far.

¶23

Learned State counsel vehemently opposes the prayer for grant of regular bail to the petitioner. He has filed the custody certificate in Court, which is taken on record. As per the custody certificate, the petitioner is in custody for the last more than 04 months and 12 days. He, upon instructions, submits that none of the prosecution witness has been examined so far.

¶24

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the

¶25

record.

¶26

In view of the above submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the facts that the petitioner is in custody for the last more than 04 months and 12 days, the alleged recovery of contraband is of noncommercial quantity and that the trial is likely to take a long time because none of the prosecution witness has been examined so far, therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner during the pendency of the trial as the continuous detention of the petitioner would not serve the ends of justice.

¶27

SONIA GUGNANI 2026.04.17 16.43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶28

CRM-M-6123-2026 -3-

¶29

Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bail bonds, surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned.

¶30

However, it is made clear that in case the petitioner misuses the concession of bail, the State/complainant/injured would be at liberty to seek cancellation of his bail.

¶31

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

¶32

SONIA GUGNANI 2026.04.17 16.43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

Ajay Kumar Alias Mattu v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Kumar Alias Mattu v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Deepali and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Karanjeet Singh Vs State of Punjab

Gurmukh Singh Vs State of Punjab

U Vs U

Gurbachan Singh Batra Vs Harsh Barbhutta

Gurpreet Singh Vs State of Punjab