01Facts
The petitioners sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in a case arising from FIR No. 178 dated 16 May 2025, registered at Police Station Sadar Fatehabad under Sections 15(c), 27A, 29 and 31 of the NDPS Act and Section 238 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (formerly Section 201 IPC).
p. 2 · ¶ 1The prosecution alleged that 240.860 kg of poppy husk was recovered from a pick-up vehicle in which both petitioners were travelling.
p. 2 · ¶ 3The petitioners had been in custody since their arrest on 16 May 2025; the other co-accused had been granted regular bail.
p. 4 · ¶ 7–8The State opposed bail, relying on the commercial quantity recovered and the alleged transportation of the contraband in the vehicle.
p. 5 · ¶ 10–11The Court noted that neither petitioner was the vehicle’s registered owner, that the registered owner and an alleged intermediary had not been arrayed as accused, and that the petitioners had no prior NDPS-case antecedents.
pp. 5–6 · ¶ 12–1602Issues
i.Whether the petitioners should be granted regular bail despite the alleged recovery of a commercial quantity of poppy husk.
pp. 5–6 · ¶ 10, 13–17ii.Whether the petitioners’ period of custody, absence of prior NDPS antecedents, vehicle-ownership circumstances and parity with bailed co-accused supported their release on bail.
pp. 5–6 · ¶ 14–1703Law Applied
Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (formerly Section 439 Cr.P.C.), provides the basis for the High Court’s consideration of regular-bail applications.
p. 2 · ¶ 1The alleged offences were charged under Sections 15(c), 27A, 29 and 31 of the NDPS Act and Section 238 of the BNS.
p. 2 · ¶ 1The Court assessed bail by reference to the case’s overall circumstances, including the nature of the allegations, custody undergone, antecedents, circumstances of the vehicle’s ownership and parity with co-accused who had been granted bail.
p. 6 · ¶ 16–17No judicial precedent was cited in the order.
Provisions in the judgment · 7 · Linked ones open on LawLens
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 439
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 Section 15Section 29Section 31
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 238
Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 201
04Reasoning
Although the alleged recovery was of commercial quantity, the Court considered the State’s opposition alongside the fact that neither petitioner was the vehicle’s registered owner and that the registered owner and alleged intermediary had not been made accused.
pp. 5–6 · ¶ 10–14It also took account of the petitioners’ custody, the State’s confirmation that they had no prior NDPS-case antecedents, and the fact that all remaining co-accused had already been granted bail.
pp. 5–6 · ¶ 15–17On the totality of these circumstances, the Court considered regular bail appropriate.
p. 6 · ¶ 1705Holding
The Court allowed both petitions and ordered the petitioners’ release on bail, subject to furnishing bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the competent Magistrate, provided they were not required in another case.
p. 6 · ¶ 17The petitioners were directed not to threaten or influence prosecution witnesses; the observations were not to affect the trial, which was to be decided independently on the evidence.
p. 7 · ¶ 18–19The Court further stated that the order would be deemed cancelled if either petitioner were directly found engaging in similar activities in future.
p. 7 · ¶ 20Original Court PDF
Hardeep Singh Alias DeepvsState Of Haryana
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
