Punjab and Haryana High Court
CRM-M/25506/2026 of DALJEET @ MAAN Vs STATE OF PUNJAB on 28 July 2026
(O&M) -1- (221) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-25506-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision: 28.07.2026 DALJEET @ MAAN ... PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB ...RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI Present: Mr. Piyush Sharma, Advocate for the
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-25506-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision: 28.07.2026 DALJEET @ MAAN ... PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB ...RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI Present: Mr. Piyush Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. M.S. Toor, AAG, Punjab. **** JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. The prayer in the present petition under Section 483 BNSS is for the grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No.231 dated 29.08.2025 registered under Sections 21-C and 29 of the NDPS Act, 1985 (Section 27 of the NDPS Act added later on) at Police Station ANTF, District SAS Nagar.
2. The brief facts of the case are that one Bobby and Daljeet @ Mann (the present petitioner) were apprehended while travelling on a motorcycle and the recovery of 262 grams of heroin came to be effected from the petitioner. Though, Bobby was able to flee from the spot.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. The petitioner has been in custody since 29.08.2025 but none of the 23 prosecution witnesses has been examined so far. Therefore, the trial of the present case is not likely to be concluded anytime soon. Even otherwise, as the recovery from the petitioner is marginally above the commercial quantity of 250 grams of heroin, the petitioner is entitled to the grant of bail.
4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel contends that the commercial quantity of contraband has been recovered from the petitioner. Therefore, he is not entitled to the concession of bail in view of the bar contained under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. He, however, concedes that the petitioner is a first time offender, in custody since 29.08.2025 but none of the 23 prosecution witnesses has been examined so far.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
6. In the cases of ‘Sukhchain Singh @ Manga Versus State of Punjab, CRM-M-7857-2022 decided on 04.04.2022, Pardeep Singh versus State of Punjab, CRM-M-46244-2022 decided on 19.01.2023, Hari Yadav @ Haiya versus State of Punjab (CRM-M-37645-2021)’ decided on 11.11.2022, ‘Jang Kanwar Versus State of Punjab (CRM-M-53415-2021)’ decided on 19.01.2022, ‘Shankar Prashad Chanau Versus The State of Punjab, CRM-M-24090-2020, decided on 27.08.2020, Gurpreet Kumar Versus State of Punjab, CRM-M-17021-2021, decided on 31.08.2021, Salim Versus State of Haryana, CRM-M-42436-2020, decided on 24.02.2021, Gagandeep Versus State of Punjab, CRM-M-3055-2021, decided on 27.01.2021, Gurpreet Singh @ Gopi Versus State of Punjab, CRM-M- 41039-2019, decided on 26.02.2020, Dalbara Singh Versus State of Punjab, CRM-M-47880-2022 decided on 16.01.2023’, and Vivek Watts versus State of Punjab, CRM-M-13791-2022 decided on 15.02.2023, where the recovery from the accused was marginally above the commercial quantity for the respective contraband in each case, the Court granted bail to the accused therein.
7. In the present case, the alleged recovery from the petitioner is of 262 grams of heroin, which is marginally above the commercial quantity of 250 grams. In this situation, the provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act can be relaxed to an extent and the case of the petitioner can be considered for the grant of bail, moreso, when he is in custody since 29.08.2025 but none of the 23 prosecution witnesses has been examined so far.
8. Thus, without commenting upon the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner, namely, Daljeet @ Mann son of Babu Lal @ Bau Ram is ordered to be released on bail to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.
9. The petitioner shall appear on the first Monday of every month before the police station concerned till the conclusion of the trial and furnish an affidavit each time that he is not involved in any other case other than the present case.
10. In addition, the petitioner (or someone on his behalf) shall prepare an FDR in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- and deposit the same with the Trial Court. The same would be liable to be forfeited as per law in case of the absence of the petitioner from Trial without sufficient cause.
11. The petition stands disposed of. (JASJIT SINGH BEDI) JUDGE 28.07.2026 vishal Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable:- Yes/No