-
by sayum
13 March 2026 2:33 PM
In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has granted bail to a petitioner involved in a case under the stringent Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS), 1985, highlighting the importance of judicious application of law over arbitrariness. The decision was pronounced by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Anoop Chitkara in the case of Amarjeet Singh Vs State of Punjab.
Under FIR No. 135 dated 20.07.2023, the petitioner was accused of violating various provisions of the NDPS Act and sought bail under Section 439 of the CrPC. Justice Chitkara, in his observation, noted that “arbitrariness is the antithesis of law,” especially in the context of cases with a criminal history. This remark underlines the court’s approach towards balancing legal rigors with individual liberties.
The court meticulously examined the petitioner’s criminal antecedents and the nature of evidence against him. It was noted that the petitioner’s criminal history should only include cases where there was a conviction or pending FIRs where the accused is arraigned. The court also pointed out the unreliability of solely depending on disclosure statements for implicating an accused, referencing the Supreme Court judgment in Tofan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu regarding the inadmissibility of confessional statements under Section 67 of the NDPS Act.
While granting bail, the court imposed several stringent conditions on the petitioner. These included furnishing a personal bond, a surety bond, restricting the possession of SIM cards to one, surrendering weapons, and compliance with various other terms to ensure the petitioner’s attendance at trial and to prevent the recurrence of the offense.
Justice Chitkara also provided for the dynamic applicability of the bail order, stating that if the petitioner finds the bond amount or conditions beyond reach due to social and financial constraints, they may apply for a modification.
Date of Decision: 22.01.2024
AMARJEET SINGH VS STATE OF PUNJAB
