Rajinder Kaur Alias Rajju Alias Roji v. State Of Punjab

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 25.05.2026 RAJINDER KAUR ALIAS RAJJU ALIAS ROJI ... PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB ... RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present:- Mr. Damanjit Singh Sandhu, Advocate for the petitioner. H.S. Grewal, J.(Oral) 1.

This petition has been filed under Section 483 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 (erstwhile 439 Cr.P.C.) for grant of Regular Bail in case arising out of FIR no.180 dated 07.07.2024 under Sections 21/29/61 NDPS Act registered at Police Station Sahnewal District Ludhiana Punjab. 2.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner was apprehended and from her possession 270 grams of heroin was recovered. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that nothing is to be recovered form the petitioner. He further submits that the petitioner is in custody for the last 01 year 10 months and 14 days therefore prays for grant of regular bail.

4.

Notice of motion.

-25.

Mr. Rohit Hans, DAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of regular bail on the ground that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature. He has filed the custody certificate of the petitioner in Court today, which is taken on record. As per the custody certificate, the petitioner is in custody for the last 1 year, 10 months and 14 days. It has further been stated that the petitioner is involved in one other case; however, she was granted bail therein after undergoing custody for 23 days. He further submits that out of 19 cited prosecution witnesses none has been examined so far. 6.

I have heard the submissions made by the parties and gone through the record.

7.

After hearing the rival contentions and considering the fact that in the case in hand, the petitioner is in custody for the last 01 year 10 months and 14 days; the petitioner is involved in one other case; however, she was granted bail therein after undergoing custody for 23 days; out of 19 cited prosecution witnesses none has been examined so far coupled with the fact that the trial is likely to take considerable time, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served by further incarceration of the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is granted the concession of regular bail during the pendency of the trial.

8.

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 her furnishing requisite bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.

-39.

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

10.

It is clarified that if while on bail so granted through the instant order, the petitioner is found indulged in any other criminal case/activity, it shall be open to the State to seek cancellation of his bail. 25.05.2026 (H.S.GREWAL) renu JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No