Ramji v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 25.05.2026 RAMJI ... PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF HARYANA ... RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present:- Mr. Kunal Jindia, Advocate with Mr. Vicky Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Dr. Malvika Singh, D.A.G., Haryana.

H.S. GREWAL, J. (ORAL) 1.

The petitioner is seeking regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (439 Cr.P.C.) in FIR No. 166 dated 14.06.2025 under Sections 21-C, 29, 61, 85 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, registered at Police Station Hodal, District Palwal.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that on the basis of secret information, petitioner along with co-accused Ranjit Kumar was apprehended and 290.61 grams of heroin was allegedly recovered from the possession of co-accused Ranjit Kumar.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. No contraband has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. He further submits that the petitioner is in custody for the last 11 months and 10 days and is not involved in any other case. He, thus, prays for grant of bail to

the petitioner.

4.

Learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of regular bail to the petitioner on the ground of gravity of allegations. Learned State counsel has filed the custody certificate in Court, which is taken on record. She further submits that as per the custody certificate, the petitioner is in custody for the last 11 months and 10 days. 5.

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

6.

After hearing the rival contentions of the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case that at this stage, it is yet to be determined whether the petitioner was in conscious possession of the contraband which was recovered from the co-accused; the petitioner is in custody for the last 11 months and 10 days; he is not involved in any other case; the conclusion of trial is likely to take some time and continuous detention of the petitioner would not serve the ends of justice, this Court deems it fit to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner during the pendency of the trial.

7.

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 trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned.

8.

Nothing discussed hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 9.

It is clarified that while on bail so granted through the instant order the petitioner is found indulging in any other criminal case, it shall be

open to the State to seek cancellation of his bail. 10.

Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

(H.S.GREWAL) 25.05.2026 JUDGE Janki Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No