Sunny v. State Of Punjab

In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana At Chandigarh Date of Decision:- 31.10.2025 Sunny ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHAS MEHLA Present:- Ms. Deepika Verma, Advocate for Mr. Sanjeev K. Virk, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Subhash Godara, Addl. A.G., Punjab.

***** SUBHAS MEHLA , J. (Oral) 1.

By way of the present petition, the petitioner is seeking regular bail in case FIR No.140, dated 18.07.2025, registered under Sections 22-6185 of NDPS Act, at Police Station Dasuya, District Hoshiarpur. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the present petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case under the pressure by local police during 'Yudh Nashe De Virudh' compaign. It is further contended that the petitioner was apprehended during routine patrol duty and the allegations against the present petitioner is that black coloured polythene wrapper thrown by him, when it was opened and checked, then orange coloured intoxicating tablets were recovered and on counting, it comes out total 45 intoxicating tablets, however, FSL report is still awaited; challan has

( 2 ) not been presented; and he is in custody since 18.07.2025. Learned counsel further contended that no further recovery is pending and prayed that the petitioner be released on interim bail till receipt of FSL report and he is ready to cooperate with the investigating agency.

3.

Learned State counsel has produced the custody certificate of the petitioner, which shows that the petitioner is behind bars since the last about 3 months and 11 days. Custody certificate is taken on record. He has opposed the bail petition of the petitioner and contended that one more case is pending against the petitioner, hence, he prayed for dismissal of his bail petition. 4.

Heard.

5.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case; particularly the fact that the recovery of 45 intoxicating tablets is yet to be ascertained whether the same falls under commercial or intermediate quantity as the report of FSL is still awaited; moreover, the petitioner is ready to cooperate with the investigating agency; and the petitioner is in custody since last about 3 months and 11 days; the instant petition is disposed of and the petitioner is ordered to be released on interim bail till receipt of FSL report on his furnishing requisite bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned. It is made clear that if in the FSL report, it is found that alleged recovery comes under the commercial quantity, then the petitioner shall surrender himself before the trial Court and the petitioner is directed to furnish an undertaking to this effect at the time of furnishing bail bonds for releasing him on interim bail. 6.

Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed to be expression of an opinion by this Court on merits of the case. The learned

( 3 ) Court below is directed to proceed with the matter on its own merits, lest it may prejudice the trial.

( SUBHAS MEHLA ) 31.10.2025 JUDGE Geeta Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No