Sukhwinder Kaur v. State Of Punjab

CRM-M-36329-2024 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-36329-2024 Date of Decision: 08.09.2025 SUKHWINDER KAUR ... PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB ... RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present:- Mr. Jashandeep Singh Sandhu, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Rishabh Singla, AAG, Punjab.

H.S. Grewal, J.(Oral) 1.

This petition has been filed for grant of regular bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C in case FIR No. 39 dated 24.04.2024 under Sections 20,29 of NDPS Act, 1985 registered at Police Station, Moonak, District Sangrur Punjab. 2.

The case of the prosecution is that 1 Kg 350 grams of sulfa/ganja was recovered from the possession of the petitioner. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case as earlier the petitioner had dispute/altercation with the police. He further submits that the petitioner is a lady and is not involved in any other case. Moreover, the FSL regarding the percentage of the compound is unclear to declare that the contraband recovered from the petitioner is commercial.

4.

Learned State counsel has filed the custody certificate of the petitioner in the Court today and the same is taken on record. As per custody Renu Rawat 2025.09.09 16.13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-36329-2024 -2certificate, the petitioner is in custody for the last 01 year 04 months and 12 days. On asking, he further submits that out of 16 cited prosecution witnesses only 06 witnesses have been examined so far. He has not refuted the fact that the petitioner is not involved in any other case. 6.

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

7.

Keeping in view the above and the fact that only 06 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far; the petitioner is in custody for the last 01 year 04 months and 12 days; the continuous detention of the petitioner would not serve the ends of justice, therefore, this Court deems it a fit case to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner 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 bonds, surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned.

9.

It is clarified that if on bail so granted through the instant order, the applicant is found indulging in any other criminal case it shall be open to the State to seek cancellation of her bail.

(H.S.GREWAL) 08.09.2025 JUDGE renu Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No Renu Rawat 2025.09.09 16.13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document