CRM-M No.50530 of 2026 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 217 ***** CRM-M No.50530 of 2026 Date of decision : 11.9.2026 Date of uploading : 11.9.2026 Sahil ………….Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …….Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Ms. Supriya Garg, Advocate and Mr. Gaurav, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. Anup Singh, AAG, Punjab --- SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL) 1. Present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) (old Section 439 of Cr.P.C.) for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.110 dated 21.5.2026, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’) (Section 29 of NDPS Act added later on), at Police Station ANTF, SAS Nagar (Mohali). 2. The FIR in question pertains to recovery of 1.510 Kgs.of heroin and Rs.300/- as drug money. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the petitioner is in custody since 21.5.2026. Learned counsel has further submitted that ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.09.11 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.50530 of 2026 -2-

the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question. Learned counsel has further iterated that the chemical examiner’s report has not yet been received and hence the petitioner may be granted concession of interim regular bail in terms of judgment passed by Hon’ble Division Bench in the case of Inderjeet Singh @ Laddi and others Vs. State of Punjab , 2014 SCC Online P&H 24990, relevant whereof, reads as under:- “5. The learned Single Judge after considering the rival contentions found that the question whether such substances/drugs are covered under the NDPS Act or not, or can be dealt with only under the D&C Act has been arising frequently in many cases. The consequences would be completely different if the substances were held to be within the purview of the D&C Act instead of the NDPS Act. The matter was, therefore, referred to a larger bench. Meanwhile, the petitioner was ordered to be released on interim bail to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, Ludhiana.” xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx

53……. Indeed the delay in testing the sample does result in prejudice to an alleged offender as till the results are available there can be no definite certainty with regard to the contraband in respect of which there has been a contravention or that has been recovered. In such cases to await the outcome of the final FSL report where there is likely to be delayed, the accused may be released on interim bail. In Sukhwant Singh v. State of Punjab, (2009) 7 SCC 539, it has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as follows: ....... following the decision of this Court in Kamlendra Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. (2009) 4 SCC 437 we reiterate that a court hearing a regular bail application has got inherent power to grant interim bail pending final disposal of the bail application. In our opinion, this is the proper view in view of Article 21 of the Constitution of India which protects the life and liberty of every person. When a person applies for regular bail then the court concerned ordinarily lists that application ASHWANI KUMAR after a few days so that it can look into the case diary which 2026.09.11 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.50530 of 2026 -3-

has to be obtained from the police authorities and in the meantime the applicant has to go to jail. Even if the applicant is released on bail thereafter society. The reputation of a person is his valuable asset, and is a facet of his right under Article 21 of the Constitution vide Deepak Bajaj v. State of Maharashtra, (2008) 16 SCC 14. Hence, we are of the opinion that in the power to grant bail there is inherent power in the court concerned to grant interim bail to a person pending final disposal of the bail application. Of course, it is in the discretion of the court concerned to grant interim bail or not but the power is certainly there. 54. Therefore, the presiding officer of a Special Court dealing with NDPS cases wherever the need is felt and where the matter is being unnecessarily delayed may grant interim bail till the receipt of the FSL report and thereafter considered the case after the receipt of the report.”

4. Learned State counsel has opposed the present petition by arguing that the allegations raised against the petitioner are serious in nature. Learned State counsel has further submitted that the FIR in question pertains to recovery of 1.510 Kgs. of heroin and drug money of ₹300/- as well. Furthermore, expressing concerns about the possibility of the petitioner fleeing from the trial proceedings, learned State counsel submits that petitioner ought not be granted the concession of regular bail. He has, accordingly, sought for dismissal of the petition in hand. 5. I have heard counsel for the rival parties and have gone through the available records of the case. 6. The petitioner was arrested on 21.5.2026 and the matter is still under investigation. It is not in dispute that the chemical examination report has not yet been received. A perusal of the dicta of the Division Bench judgment passed in Inderjeet Singh Laddi (supra), when read in ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.09.11 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.50530 of 2026 -4- the context of the factual matrix of the present case, indubitably reflects that the petitioner ought to be granted concession of regular bail till the receipt of the chemical examiner’s report before the concerned Court. Further, recovery of ₹300/- is stated to be as drug money. However, at this juncture there is nothing forthcoming to suggest that alleged recovery of ₹300/- effected from the petitioner is drug money.

7. In view of the factual milieu of the case in hand, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is granted regular bail till the presentation of chemical examiner’s report before the concerned Court. Petitioner is ordered to be released on interim regular bail, accordingly, on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Ld. concerned trial Court/Duty Magistrate. Needless to say that the petitioner shall be entitled to apply for regular bail afresh before the concerned trial Court after presentation of chemical examiner report and his having surrendered before the concerned Court. However, in addition to conditions that may be imposed by the concerned trial Court/Duty Magistrate, the petitioner shall remain bound by the following conditions: (i) The petitioner shall not mis-use the liberty granted. (ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with any evidence, oral or documentary, during the trial. (iii) The petitioner shall not absent himself on any date before the trial. (iv) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail. (v) The petitioner shall deposit his passport, if any, with the trial Court. (vi) The petitioner shall give his cell-phone number to the Investigating Officer/SHO of concerned Police Station and shall not change his cell-phone number without prior permission of the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate. (vii) The petitioner shall not in any manner try to delay the trial. (viii) The petitioner shall submit, on the first working day of

ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.09.11 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.50530 of 2026 -5- every month, an affidavit, before the concerned trial Court, to the effect that he has not been involved in commission of any offence after being released on bail. In case the petitioner is found to be involved in any offence after his being enlarged on bail in the present FIR, on the basis of his affidavit or otherwise, the State is mandated to move, forthwith, for cancellation of his bail which plea, but of course, shall be ratiocinated upon merits thereof. 8. In case of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions and those which may be imposed by concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate as directed hereinabove or upon showing any other sufficient cause, the State/complainant shall be at liberty to move cancellation of bail of the petitioner. 9. Ordered accordingly. 10. Nothing said hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. (SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE 11.9.2026 Ashwanii Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.09.11 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M No.50530 of 2026 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 217 ***** CRM-M No.50530 of 2026 Date of decision : 11.9.2026 Date of uploading : 11.9.2026 Sahil ………….Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …….Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Ms. Supriya Garg, Advocate and Mr. Gaurav, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. Anup Singh, AAG, Punjab --- SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL) 1. Present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) (old Section 439 of Cr.P.C.) for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.110 dated 21.5.2026, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’) (Section 29 of NDPS Act added later on), at Police Station ANTF, SAS Nagar (Mohali). 2. The FIR in question pertains to recovery of 1.510 Kgs.of heroin and Rs.300/- as drug money. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the petitioner is in custody since 21.5.2026. Learned counsel has further submitted that ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.09.11 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.50530 of 2026 -2-

the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question. Learned counsel has further iterated that the chemical examiner’s report has not yet been received and hence the petitioner may be granted concession of interim regular bail in terms of judgment passed by Hon’ble Division Bench in the case of Inderjeet Singh @ Laddi and others Vs. State of Punjab , 2014 SCC Online P&H 24990, relevant whereof, reads as under:- “5. The learned Single Judge after considering the rival contentions found that the question whether such substances/drugs are covered under the NDPS Act or not, or can be dealt with only under the D&C Act has been arising frequently in many cases. The consequences would be completely different if the substances were held to be within the purview of the D&C Act instead of the NDPS Act. The matter was, therefore, referred to a larger bench. Meanwhile, the petitioner was ordered to be released on interim bail to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, Ludhiana.” xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx

53……. Indeed the delay in testing the sample does result in prejudice to an alleged offender as till the results are available there can be no definite certainty with regard to the contraband in respect of which there has been a contravention or that has been recovered. In such cases to await the outcome of the final FSL report where there is likely to be delayed, the accused may be released on interim bail. In Sukhwant Singh v. State of Punjab, (2009) 7 SCC 539, it has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as follows: ....... following the decision of this Court in Kamlendra Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. (2009) 4 SCC 437 we reiterate that a court hearing a regular bail application has got inherent power to grant interim bail pending final disposal of the bail application. In our opinion, this is the proper view in view of Article 21 of the Constitution of India which protects the life and liberty of every person. When a person applies for regular bail then the court concerned ordinarily lists that application ASHWANI KUMAR after a few days so that it can look into the case diary which 2026.09.11 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.50530 of 2026 -3-

has to be obtained from the police authorities and in the meantime the applicant has to go to jail. Even if the applicant is released on bail thereafter society. The reputation of a person is his valuable asset, and is a facet of his right under Article 21 of the Constitution vide Deepak Bajaj v. State of Maharashtra, (2008) 16 SCC 14. Hence, we are of the opinion that in the power to grant bail there is inherent power in the court concerned to grant interim bail to a person pending final disposal of the bail application. Of course, it is in the discretion of the court concerned to grant interim bail or not but the power is certainly there. 54. Therefore, the presiding officer of a Special Court dealing with NDPS cases wherever the need is felt and where the matter is being unnecessarily delayed may grant interim bail till the receipt of the FSL report and thereafter considered the case after the receipt of the report.”

4. Learned State counsel has opposed the present petition by arguing that the allegations raised against the petitioner are serious in nature. Learned State counsel has further submitted that the FIR in question pertains to recovery of 1.510 Kgs. of heroin and drug money of ₹300/- as well. Furthermore, expressing concerns about the possibility of the petitioner fleeing from the trial proceedings, learned State counsel submits that petitioner ought not be granted the concession of regular bail. He has, accordingly, sought for dismissal of the petition in hand. 5. I have heard counsel for the rival parties and have gone through the available records of the case. 6. The petitioner was arrested on 21.5.2026 and the matter is still under investigation. It is not in dispute that the chemical examination report has not yet been received. A perusal of the dicta of the Division Bench judgment passed in Inderjeet Singh Laddi (supra), when read in ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.09.11 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.50530 of 2026 -4- the context of the factual matrix of the present case, indubitably reflects that the petitioner ought to be granted concession of regular bail till the receipt of the chemical examiner’s report before the concerned Court. Further, recovery of ₹300/- is stated to be as drug money. However, at this juncture there is nothing forthcoming to suggest that alleged recovery of ₹300/- effected from the petitioner is drug money.

7. In view of the factual milieu of the case in hand, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is granted regular bail till the presentation of chemical examiner’s report before the concerned Court. Petitioner is ordered to be released on interim regular bail, accordingly, on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Ld. concerned trial Court/Duty Magistrate. Needless to say that the petitioner shall be entitled to apply for regular bail afresh before the concerned trial Court after presentation of chemical examiner report and his having surrendered before the concerned Court. However, in addition to conditions that may be imposed by the concerned trial Court/Duty Magistrate, the petitioner shall remain bound by the following conditions: (i) The petitioner shall not mis-use the liberty granted. (ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with any evidence, oral or documentary, during the trial. (iii) The petitioner shall not absent himself on any date before the trial. (iv) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail. (v) The petitioner shall deposit his passport, if any, with the trial Court. (vi) The petitioner shall give his cell-phone number to the Investigating Officer/SHO of concerned Police Station and shall not change his cell-phone number without prior permission of the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate. (vii) The petitioner shall not in any manner try to delay the trial. (viii) The petitioner shall submit, on the first working day of

ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.09.11 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.50530 of 2026 -5- every month, an affidavit, before the concerned trial Court, to the effect that he has not been involved in commission of any offence after being released on bail. In case the petitioner is found to be involved in any offence after his being enlarged on bail in the present FIR, on the basis of his affidavit or otherwise, the State is mandated to move, forthwith, for cancellation of his bail which plea, but of course, shall be ratiocinated upon merits thereof. 8. In case of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions and those which may be imposed by concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate as directed hereinabove or upon showing any other sufficient cause, the State/complainant shall be at liberty to move cancellation of bail of the petitioner. 9. Ordered accordingly. 10. Nothing said hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. (SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE 11.9.2026 Ashwanii Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No ASHWANI KUMAR 2026.09.11 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document