Palwinder Singh v. State Of Punjab

- 1 -

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Decided on : 11.08.2025 Palwinder Singh . . . Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Punjab . . . Respondent(s)

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH PRESENT: Mr. Vaibhav Narang, Advocate, for the petitioner(s).

Mr. Jasdeep Singh, Addl. AG, Punjab.

**** SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral) 1.

The instant petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C.), for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, during the pendency of trial, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder:- Name of Petitioner(s) FIR No.

Date Section(s) Police Station District 11.06.2025 22(b), 27(a) of NDPS Act, 1985 Sultanwind Amritsar Palwinder Singh 2.

Recovery in the present case is of 10.11 grams of 'Heroin' along with currency amounting to 550/-.

₹ Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the recovered contraband is only slightly more than double the 'small quantity', but in any case, it is substantially below the maximum limit of the 'non-commercial quantity', i.e., 250 grams. It is further submitted that the petitioner is not alleged to be involved in any other case of similar nature, as no other case

- 2 - stands registered against him under the NDPS Act. Besides, he is a young boy of 19 years, with his entire career ahead of him, and ought to be given an opportunity to rehabilitate himself. The petitioner has undergone incarceration for a period of about 01 month and 27 days, and no useful purpose would be served by keeping him in custody for an indefinite period during trial. It is further argued that, considering his young age, prolonged detention in jail may expose him to hardened criminals, which would be detrimental to his future prospects.

Accordingly, learned counsel prays for the grant of concession of regular bail to the petitioner.

3.

On the other hand, while vehemently opposing the prayer of bail, learned State counsel submits that keeping in view the nature of offence, he does not deserve concession of bail. However, learned State counsel though does not dispute the factual position, as explained by the petitioner's counsel here-above.

4.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant material available on record.

5.

While considering the plea of bail, this Court is conscious of the fact of recovery of narcotic contraband from the petitioner. However, this Court also cannot overlook other factual aspects, such as; the young age of the petitioner, his first-time involvement in a case under the NDPS Act, the total period of incarceration already undergone, as well as the potential risk of his coming into contact with hardened criminals in the eventuality of prolonged detention. Therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to consider the plea of bail of the petitioner.

- 3 - 6.

Consequently, prayer made in the present petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, subject to his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/ Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Illaqa Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case.

7.

Needless to observe that the petitioner shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witness in any manner directly or indirectly.

8.

The observation made here-in-above shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the facts of the case and the Trial Court is expected to decide the case on the basis of complete evidence available on record.

9.

It is further made clear that if, in future, petitioner is directly found indulged in similar kind of activities, this order shall be deemed to be cancelled.

10.

Petition stands disposed of.

(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE August 11, 2025 J.Ram Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No