Charanjit Singh Alias Channa v. State Of Punjab

CRM-M No.40842 of 20225 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** CRM-M No.40842 of 2025 Date of decision : 5.8.2025 Charanjit Singh @ Channa .............Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. Paras Khindri, Legal Aid Counsel for the petitioner Mr. Baljinder Singh Sra, Addl. AG, Punjab --- SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL) 1.

Present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.27 dated 25.6.2024, under Sections 22, 27, 61 and 85 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, registered at Police Station GRP Pathankot, District Pathankot.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is in custody since 25.6.2024. Learned counsel has further argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question. Learned counsel has further iterated that the mandatory provision of NDPS Act has not been scrupulously complied with and thus the petitioner deserves to be enlarged on bail.

Ashwani Kumar 2025.08.05 18:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M No.40842 of 20225 -23. Learned State counsel has opposed the present petition by arguing that the allegations raised are serious in nature and thus the petitioner does not deserve the concession of the regular bail. Learned State counsel has further iterated that the petitioner is accused of offence pertaining to commercial quantity under the NDPS Act, and thus, his bail petition is barred in view of the Section 37 of the Act. He further submits that out of total 10 prosecution witnesses, 2 have been given up and remaining 8 stands examined.

4.

I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the available records of the case.

5.

Keeping in view the factum that contraband recovered from the petitioner being commercial quantity and the entire prosecution evidence having been led, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.

(SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE 5.8.2025 Ashwani Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No Ashwani Kumar 2025.08.05 18:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document