High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/37072/2025allowed

Mintu Singh v. State Of Punjab

2026-01-12Mr. Justice Yashvir Singh Rathor5 pages

CRM-M-37072-2025 (O&M) -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-37072-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 12.01.2026 MINTU SINGH ....PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB ...RESPONDENT

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR Present :

Mr. J.S. Sandhu, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Gorav Kathuria, DAG Punjab.

**** YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR. J.(Oral) 1.

The present 2nd petition under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.53 dated 11.08.2022, registered under Sections 22, 22(c), 29 of NDPS Act, 1985, at Police Station Kotfatta, District Bathinda, Punjab.

Status report dated 11.10.2025 by way of affidavit of Harvinder Singh Sra, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Rural Bathinda filed by respondentState through registry is taken on record. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned State counsel have been heard and material collected by the police during investigation has been perused.

As per the prosecution case, one Gurpreet Singh @ Pita was arrested on 11.08.2022 and 1700 tablets of Tramadol were recovered from him. On interrogation, he suffered disclosure statement and nominated the present petitioner as the supplier. After he was nominated, his house was searched which led to

CRM-M-37072-2025 (O&M) -2recovery of 3200 tablets of Alprazolam and 200 tablets of Tramadol, which were lying near the boundary wall of the house. Thereafter, co-accused namely Kamlesh and Happy were arrested. Petitioner was arrested on 19.08.2024. After completion of investigation, final report has been presented. 5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that co-accused namely Gurpreet Singh @ Pita, Happy and Kamlesh Kumar have already been released on bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 17.05.2024 in CRM-M21503-2024, 11.08.2023 in CRM-M-12407-2023 and 06.07.2023 in CRM-M29690-2023, respectively. Learned counsel next contended that challan has already been presented and charges have been framed, and out of total 12 witnesses cited by prosecution, only 1 has been examined. The petitioner is in custody since 19.08.2024. Moreover, the case of the petitioner is identical to that of co-accused and the trial will take sufficiently long time to conclude and his further detention is not required.

Learned counsel further contended that in view of his long incarceration, petitioner is entitled to be released on bail, as prolonged incarceration, generally militates against the most precious fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution and the conditional liberty must override the statutory embargo created under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon judgments passed in CRM-M-21794 of 2023 - Sandeep Singh v. State of Punjab decided on 05.05.2023, CRR-1785 of 2018 (O&M)- Vicky Kaur v. State of Punjab, decided on 13.08.2018, CRM-M-14029 of 2018 Kamlesh v. State of Punjab, decided on 06.05.2015, CRM-M-17321 of 2025 Jassu Ram @ Jasuram v. State of Punjab, decided on 04.04.

2025 and a judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. (s).

CRM-M-37072-2025 (O&M) -3Abhay Mondal v. The State of West Bengal, judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court passed in Criminal Appeal No.4883/2025 - Santosh Pawar Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Anr. decided on 14.11.2025 and (2022) 10 SCC 52, Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation. 6.

On the other hand, learned State counsel has opposed the bail and argued that petitioner has committed a heinous offence and in view of the gravity of the offence, petitioner does not deserve the concession of bail. 7.

Hon'ble Supreme Court in 2023 Live Law (SC) 533, Rabi Prakash v. State of Odisha has held that prolonged incarceration, generally militates against the most precious fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution and in such a situation, the conditional liberty must override the statutory embargo created under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. To the same effect is the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in 2024 (4) RCR (Criminal) 172, Ankur Chaudhary v. State of Madhya Pradesh 2023 AIR(SC) 1648, Mohammad Muslim alias Hussain v. State (NCT of Delhi) in which Hon'ble Supreme Court while granting regular bail to an accused, from whom commercial quantity of contraband was recovered, has held that grant of bail on the ground of undue delay in trial cannot be said to be fettered by Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

A co-ordinate Bench of this Court has also held so in judgment reported as Law Finder Doc Id #2770222 Garpawandeep Singh alias Bihari v. State of Punjab decided vide judgment dated 27.08.2025 passed in CRM-M-19408 of 2025 wherein 260 grams of heroin was allegedly recovered. Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No.12788/2023 titled Nandalal Mondal alias Abhay Mondal v. The State of West Bengal, vide judgment dated 03.01.

CRM-M-37072-2025 (O&M) -4the fact that he does not have any criminal antecedents and also keeping in view the prolonged incarceration, ordered release of the petitioner on bail who was found in possession of 10,000 ml of codeine phosphate - a cough syrup which falls within the commercial quantity. Hon'ble Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal No.4883/2025 titled Santosh Pawar Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Anr. (supra), has held that appellant who was being prosecuted for being in possession of commercial quantity of narcotic substance was entitled for bail in view of her incarceration for a period of 19 months. In Satender Kumar Antil's case (supra), prolonged incarceration and inordinate delay engaged the attention of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, which considered the correct approach towards bail, with respect to several enactments, including Section 37 of NDPS Act. The Court expressed the opinion that Section 436A of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (which requires inter alia the accused to be enlarged on bail if the trial is not concluded within specified periods) would apply.

Petitioner is in custody since 19.08.2024. Co-accused namely Gurpreet Singh @ Pita, Happy and Kamlesh Kumar have already been released on bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 17.05.2024 in CRM-M-215032024, 11.08.2023 in CRM-M-12407-2023 and 06.07.2023 in CRM-M-29690-2023, respectively. Charges have already been framed and only 1 witness has been examined, out of all 12 prosecution witnesses. As such, the conditional liberty must override the statutory embargo created under Section 37 of the NDPS Act and grant of bail on the ground of undue delay in trial cannot be said to be fettered by Section 37 of the NDPS Act. Therefore, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the present case and also the ratio of law laid down in aforementioned case laws, I am of the opinion that no useful purpose will be served by

CRM-M-37072-2025 (O&M) -5keeping the petitioner in custody and resultantly, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bond and surety bond to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned, on usual terms and conditions. However, in addition to the terms and conditions that may be imposed by the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned, petitioner shall remain bound by the following conditions:- (i) Petitioner shall not misuse the concession of bail granted to him.

(ii) Petitioner shall not tamper with any evidence, oral or documentary during the trial.

(iii) Petitioner shall regularly appear before the trial Court and he will not commit any offence of similar nature while on bail. (iv) Petitioner shall deposit his passport, if any, with the trial Court. (v) Petitioner shall not in any manner delay the trial. 9.

In case of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions or the conditions that may be imposed by the trial Court or upon any other sufficient cause, the State shall be at liberty to apply for cancellation of bail. 10.

Pending misc. application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 12.01.2026 (YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR) Vishal Vardhan JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned.

Yes/No Whether Reportable.

Yes/No