Iqbal Singh @ Kala v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH

Date of decision: 19.01.2026 Date of uploading: 19.01.2026










  

 !"
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL

Present:

Mr. Abhishek Narang, Advocate for the petitioner. 


  


 

 ***** SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL) 
 
  
 





 
!"

#$

%



%






   

&'(
$
!)
 
*+*+*,
% 


  
*-.


$

!!,

 
     
(  
  
&   
*

The gravamen of the allegations against the petitioner is that the petitioner was apprehended by the police upon secret information. Upon having conducted search thereof, recovery of 8.39 grams of heroin was allegedly effected from him.
3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 12.10.2025. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated

P a g e | 2 into the FIR in question. Learned counsel has further submitted that the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act have not been complied with, and thus, the prosecution case suffers from inherent defects. Learned counsel has iterated that the contraband alleged to have been recovered from the petitioner is 8.39 grams of Heroin, which is non-commercial quantity specified in the notification issued under the NDPS Act. Thus, regular bail is prayed for.

4.

Learned State counsel seeks to place on record custody certificate dated 3.11.2025. Learned State counsel has opposed the present petition by arguing that allegations raised against the petitioner are serious in nature and, thus, he does not deserve the concession of the regular bail. /  
 



 










 
+0+*+*)

1 
2 







5.

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

6.

The petitioner was arrested on 12.10.2025 whereinafter investigation was carried out and challan was presented on 08.12.2025. Total 20 witnesses have been cited, but none has been examined till date. The contraband alleged to have been recovered from the petitioner is 8.39 grams of Heroin, which is indubitably non-commercial quantity, hence rigor of Section 37 would not apply.

The rival contentions of the learned counsel for the parties; as to the whether the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR, shall be gone into during the course of trial. This Court does not deem it appropriate to delve deep into these rival contentions, at this stage lest it

P a g e | 3 may prejudice the rights of either of the parties. $ %


%  
 
  %
2 

 


 


   
  %

3



4  

  %
2 

3

%
   5   6.1.

As per the custody certificate dated 09.01.2026 filed by the learned State counsel, the petitioner has suffered incarceration for more than 2 months and 27 days. As per the said custody certificate, the petitioner is stated to be involved in three more cases. 25
 

 3




%




  









  
 %






   


&'(

6  
2 

3 
 


%



%






&'(

6  

  

 %



  3




 
&'(
(



 
% 








4 %3 


 7 
 3
1 









 




 




 !8
 5  
# 
4 %3 


 7 
1


 %
1 

  
"


##

 




$%%
9
4 %3 

 
1 
&
' ( &
  

) 
 *



+,
 

*0*+*


-.



+,
##
(  




#

Suffice to say, the further detention of the petitioner in custody is not required in the facts and circumstances of the case. 7.

The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate. However, in addition to conditions that may be

P a g e | 4 imposed by the concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate, the petitioner shall remain bound by the following conditions:- (i) The petitioner shall not mis-use the liberty granted. (ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with any evidence, oral or documentary, during the trial.

(iii) The petitioner shall not absent himself on any date before the trial.

(iv) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail.

(v) The petitioner shall deposit his passport, if any, with the trial Court.

(vi) The petitioner shall give his cell phone number to the Investigating Officer/SHO of concerned Police Station and shall not change his cell-phone number without prior permission of the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate.

(vii) The petitioner shall not in any manner try to delay the trial.

(viii) The petitioner shall submit, on the first working day of every month, an affidavit, before the concerned trial Court, to the effect that she has not been involved in commission of any offence after being released on bail. In case the petitioner is found to be involved in any offence after her being enlarged on bail in the present FIR, on the basis of her affidavit or otherwise, the State is mandated to move, forthwith, for cancellation of her bail which plea, but of course, shall be ratiocinated upon merits thereof. 8.

In case of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions and those which may be imposed by concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate as directed hereinabove or upon showing any other sufficient cause, the

P a g e | 5 State/complainant shall be at liberty to move cancellation of bail of the petitioner.

9.

Ordered accordingly.

10.

Nothing said hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

11.

Since the main case has been decided, pending miscellaneous application, if any, shall also stands disposed off. (SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE January 19, 2026  Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No