Deepak Alias Laddu Alias Deepak Jangra v. State Of Haryana

   
     




"#$# %&

'

'



           
& )* +'

+
  +,

-$% &

    !

"#    

  $  ! %!   &&&  +, '

/*0 ' By virtue of the present petition under Section 483 BNSS, petitioner, co-accused in case bearing FIR No.39 dated 05.02.2025 registered against him, for commission of offences punishable u/s 15(c) and 60 of the NDPS Act at Police Station IMT Rohtak, District Rohtak, has prayed for grant of bail.

2.

Relevant facts emerging from documents on record be noticed hereinbelow:- (  #   )   #    


 

     



 

 # $%

!  &'(

  

  )*

+  "

, #*

,

  - !

. / , 0 # , -!

)

- !  ,

 , - 1" - !

,  ,

#

 

123 

1" - !

# , -   - !

 #  

 %  



  

"  #"

4# 

  ! +#  

*



*

!

  -  ."

 #/ "

 1&

657

$  8'9 

 "

 1& 5- 7
7 .!

 #/ + !

: 

*

 

$  8'9 

 1& 5- 7
7



 !# 

!

- 



+  

#,  the NDPS Act !  " 

# 

  !

 

+ !  

 

- 

 +

;00   ( ! "  4#   ! #

 +  "

 

# 

#

 + 

. / 

++

    

  



"

$  '9

 ! 4#   

< #



#  #

 +    

+

4#

# +





*



)=  >++

  +#





#    

"

* + 

 > 

" #"

4#  

# ! +#





"  #

* + 

 ! +#

2?

" 3
" 

4# /  



 



     

    #

#

   ! 



# .

@ , $ @ # , & 

/

 # 

! 

 

  *  " 4# +#

#  



     +

 * +##  ! ,  ,   -.-

-
. /" $#    )$ )   $

$  

!

  0  / , / "     -1-1
-
. "  , # !    ) $ 4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. The requisite statutory formalities were not complied with in letter and spirit by the police team at the site. Despite having received secret information no efforts were made by the investigating team to join any independent person as a 'witness' to the case proceedings. It is further the submission of learned counsel that for reasons best known to I.O. the samples alleged to have been drawn from the contraband in presence of the Magistrate were sent to the FSL after an unexplained delay of more than 01 month and there is no explanation forthcoming for this lapse. The next leg of submission raised by learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner a young boy, who has been in custody since 05.02.2025, deserves a lenient view to be taken his favour as completion of trial in the near future is quite remote, for out of 21 witnesses none stands examined till date. T !     ## ,  " 

 $    , $ ) "$"  2 /$    

 #$
'    3   4  /$ ,    )/!    $$,     ) /  5.

Per contra, learned State counsel while referring to the status report dated 25.01.2026 filed by way of affidavit of Mr. Dalip Singh, HPS,     $#!

  has opposed the request for grant of bail on the ground that Naka was laid by the police authorities after receiving an authentic secret information that petitioner and other co-accused, who are habitual drug peddlers, were apprehended while keeping in their illegal possession of huge quantity of contraband. Informant further disclosed the identification details of the vehicle in which all four accused were travelling. It

is also the contention of the learned counsel that mandatory provision of NDPS Act were complied with after which recovery of '.5 6 *- / 7#//#$ 8  9 and contraband recovered in the present case falls within the 'Commercial Quantity'. In view thereof, rigors of Section 37 of NDPS Act are attracted which bar the grant of bail, unless the twin conditions prescribed in the provision are satisfied. That apart learned State counsel contends that in view of the past antecedents of the petitioner, who is involved in another case 24 :
51 
-
'

; '5;'1;'<;*
*;*
;*-5 43!  4

$ ! = ,, if lenient view is taken in his(p) favour, the likelihood of him indulging in similar offence and fleeing from process of justice cannot be ruled out.   /# )        ) $ #$  /$        )   6.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the documents on record.

7.

Before proceeding to discuss the rival contentions, it would be appropriate to refer to judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court wherein case titled as Shambu Lal Gurjar Vs. State of Rajasthan, SLP Criminal 16671 of 2024, decided on 23.04.2024, it was held as under:- A%

"  " 



*  5
"  # ,!

 

/ + 



 

 



1(

"




26 
2 


 



!  

& "

# &

    # "

#  0  & 



#

  



+ 

 

 !

 #"

 

 

 #



0

 

 







#

B

4



        

  !! >)$  / 3   $         3    )$    #  ;##     

    )  # 

  $    )$    $ ) ##$

      , /     "

#$% &"' (#  )    *+  , -  ./ ./! #   

  # 

  $! >)$  / 3   )$   ##  ;$$ ,  ,      )$  ?:@ @ 3   # #  /A  )" #//#$ 8  4
  , $  , $   & "'(#)  *+, -0/11 0! >)$  / 3   )$   ##  ! "$"   #  #
'7#9;
5  :! #  # 

 /$ ,   ##  ! ,  )$  ) $$, /$$  *2
  &"'(#*+ )  , -0/110!      $ # 

 ,   ##  ! #+##  "! ,  , $$ #      
<- )$  ?:@ @ 3    73//#$ 8  ,    ##  )$ )   >)$  / 3  4 ,  &"'(#)  *+, - 0//.! >)$  / 3   )$     ,  , $ #      $$$   ?:@ @ 3    7     $ # 

   #) 9 0  "  "$     /    " # ,$$ )  )   $ $ 3 

   #     $  ## # , )$  #$  $, ,"! , $ 

#  $ 

 $ )$!   3  # / )$"     ## /#  , #     )   /$# ! #$

        $$!   " # $       #  ,$$    ## $ )         #//    $$

#

 #   #/$ #      # )   $ #   #$   )$ 1 "       

/!   #$   3 $ $) /  "      /) %  $$ )

   #$     $     #   " ) )    #   3           $   , ) " )  

    !    /! ,     #  $ ) ##$

     ! , ) "$"      #$
'

   3   4 ! #$

    

$  , !  !

$ )    #$  (=$   $  $  ##   A#C  $ ) >)$  / 3   

- 3$'

+



- - 4$5

%4

% 5-.

/ 0 '
''

/
-#2#%

 $$ !      ##  )$  )B#      )$;  )     #  $ $ 3 ;

 ##  0    $$ )  )   $$, # D+ /

 

*

# #  



#  





#

/

 

#

  

/

 # = ,





#   */





#

 

+ :

 #

:

  

+



# .*/

 

  ++

++





#  



#

+

.* /

 

  



 



#

  

  4#

+ 



  #

, +  # + 

#   

++

 

   .*

/

    #

 .*

/

 +#   

#

%

# +!

 

"



#





 

"



+  







   

 %

# 



  :/



#,(# $"



 

 

  





 < ## $ !      $$,   /  #$    #     )#     # !     $$ )  $)   ##$$  )$       )     4 ",    )"!   #$     )" /   $/        #   ,  ) #       /    #    $ , #

  $     )"

/ +,

'

'

 *

# E   ; D@;: E   )$ D@;: