Paras Sharma v. State Of Punjab

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh Date of Decision: 26.05.2026 Paras Sharma ... Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Punjab ... Respondent(s) CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Surya Partap Singh.

Present:

Mr. Harshit R. Nain and Mr. Hari Ram, Advocates for the petitioner(s).

Mr. J.S.Thind, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, for the respondent.

Surya Partap Singh, J.

1.

This petition for bail is the first petition filed by the petitioner under Section 483 of 'the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023'. It has been filed with regard to a case arising out of FIR No. 272 dated 09.10.2025 for the commission of offence punishable under Section(s) 20(c), 29 & 27 of 'the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985', Police Station ANTF, Sector 79, District S.A.S. Nagar, Punjab. In the alternative a prayer for interim bail has also been made in the present petition. 2.

The FIR of this case came into being at the instance of 'ASI Suresh Kumar', who had reported that on 09.10.2025 at about 12:30 P.M., when he was leading a team of police officials, deputed for patrolling duty, on the basis of a tip-off given by a reliable source, accused, namely 'Sahil Sangar alias Jaggu', 'Paras Sharma' (the petitioner herein), 'Ritik Sharma', and 'Amit Pathania' were apprehended while travelling in Mahindra XUV-

500 bearing registration No. CH-01-AN-0199. As per abovenamed police officer from their possession 3 kgs. & 650 grams of 'Charas' was recovered. 3.

It is the case of the prosecution that pursuant to recovery of above-mentioned contraband, necessary formalities with regard to seizure & sealing of contraband, lodging of FIR, and formal arrest of the accused were completed, and further investigation taken up. 4.

Notice of motion.

5.

Since advance notice has already been served upon the State, Mr. J.S.Thind, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State. Hence, service of notice upon the State is hereby dispensed with. The learned State counsel seeks time to file reply. 6.

Heard.

7.

During the course of arguments, it has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that at this stage, he would like to press for the relief of interim bail only, and that he is not pressing the present petition for regular bail.

8.

In view of above, the request for regular bail, is hereby declined as not pressed, at this stage.

9.

The interim bail has been sought on the ground ground that the petitioner is a student of M.B.A., and that till 06.06.2026 his five exams are scheduled. It has also been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has clean antecedents, and that he has already suffered incarceration for a period of seven months & 13 days. 10.

The learned State counsel has not disputed the fact that the petitioner is a student of M.B.A., and that the examination schedule of the

petitioner is fixed till 06.06.2026.

11.

The record has been perused carefully.

12.

Taking into consideration the above-mentioned facts and circumstances, the petitioner is hereby admitted to interim bail for a period of 12 days, i.e. with effect from 27.05.2026 to 08.06.2026 on furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate. The petitioner shall surrender before the jail authorities by 05:00 P.M. on 08.06.2026.

13.

The present petition stands disposed of, accordingly. (Surya Partap Singh) Judge May 26, 2026 "DK"

Whether speaking/reasoned :Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No