Sarabjeet Singh vs Narcotics Control Bureau on 25 April, 2026

    0
    33
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Delhi High Court – Orders

    Sarabjeet Singh vs Narcotics Control Bureau on 25 April, 2026

                           $~6
                           *         IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                           +         BAIL APPLN. 3753/2025
                                     SARABJEET SINGH                                                     .....Applicant
                                                  Through:                             Mr. Vikram Hegde and Mr. A.
                                                                                       Hansaraman, Advs.
    
                                                                             Versus
    
                                     NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU                 .....Respondent
                                                  Through: Ms. Shelly Dixit, Advocate for Mr.
                                                             Arun Khatri, SSC
                                     CORAM:
                                     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE
                                                  ORDER
    

    % 25.04.2026

    1. The present matter is being taken up for hearing today, since,
    03.03.2026 was declared a holiday.

    SPONSORED

    2. By virtue of the present application under Section 483 of the
    Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) read with Section 37 of
    the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act),
    the applicant seeks grant of regular bail in S.C. No. 4172023, Crime No.
    VIII/24/DZU/2023 for the commission of offences punishable under
    Sections 8(c)/20(b)/22(c)/23/27A/29 of the NDPS Act.

    3. As per facts, on 29.05.2023, upon receipt of secret information,
    accused Gajender Singh was intercepted by the raiding team when he
    arrived at the DTDC Office for booking a parcel. Upon search, a recovery
    of 15 LSD paper blots (weighing 0.3g) was effectuated at his instance and
    additional recovery of 650 LDS Blots was also made from his home.
    Thereafter, accused Gajender Singh, in his disclosure statement disclosed

    BAIL APPLN. 3753/2025 Page 1 of 5

    This is a digitally signed order.

    The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
    The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 28/04/2026 at 21:11:19
    that he used to book parcels on the directions of co-accused Shainu
    Hathwar, who disclosed that she had purchased the LSD Blots from
    Sarabjeet Singh/ present applicant. Based thereon, on 30.05.2023, a search
    was conducted at the applicant’s house in Jaipur, wherefrom recovery of
    9006 LSD Blots and 1.116 Kg of Ganja along with Rs.4,65,500/- in cash
    was effectuated.

    4. Pursuant thereto, based on the disclosure statement made by the
    applicant herein about other consignments of such nature, the following
    recoveries were made: (i) 84 LSD Blots (45 LSD Blots weighing 0.7g and
    39 LSD Blots weighing 0.7g) from Consignment bearing no.W60822411,
    delivered to co-accused Manthan Raina in Noida; (ii) 5006 LSD Blots
    from Parcel no.RR6739971691, intercepted at Post Office Mahasainik,
    Pune; (iii) 100 LSD Blots from Parcel No.W60803432, intercepted at the
    DTDC Courier Service, Kerala; and (iv) 100 LSD Blots from Parcel
    No.W60803434, intercepted at the DTDC Express Ltd., Aminjikarai,
    Chennai. Thereafter, the NCB filed its complaint before the learned
    Special Judge NDPS, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi on 24.11.2023.

    5. Mr. Vikram Hegde, learned counsel for the applicant primarily
    submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case
    as there is no material on record to show that the applicant had any
    knowledge of the parcel or its alleged contents recovered from the co-
    accused. Further, there is no credible link/ evidence to connect the alleged
    recovery of LSD Blots from the co-accused with the parcels whose
    receipts were purportedly recovered from the applicant.

    6. He submits that the record reveals material inconsistencies in both
    quantity and weight allegedly recovered from the applicant and produced

    BAIL APPLN. 3753/2025 Page 2 of 5

    This is a digitally signed order.

    The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
    The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 28/04/2026 at 21:11:19
    before the Court at the stage of proceedings under Section 52A of the
    NDPS Act. Mark AA was recorded as comprising 5780 LSD Blots
    weighing 147.24g, however, the same sample later shows an unexplained
    increase of 82 LSD Blots as also reduction in weight by approximately 3
    grams. Likewise, Mark BB, which was recorded at 56g at the time of
    seizure, however, the same is shown as 56.41g, thereby undermining the
    credibility of the prosecution’s evidence.

    7. He further submits that the applicant has been in judicial custody
    since 30.05.2023 i.e. for more two (2) years and nine (9) months as on
    date, the chargesheet has already been filed, charges have been framed and
    out of a total of forty six (46) witnesses only two (2) have been examined
    till date, therefore, since trial is likely to take some time, keeping the
    applicant in judicial custodial would not serve any fruitful purpose. Lastly,
    he seeks to invoke the principle of parity, as the co-accused Shainu
    Hatwar and Ravi Jhinga, have already been granted regular bail by this
    Court vide judgments dated 03.03.2025 and 01.04.2025 respectively.

    8. Per contra, Ms. Shelly Dixit, learned counsel for the State relying
    upon the Status Report, opposes the present application and submits that
    since the offence involves recovery of 9006 LSD Blots and 1.116 Kg of
    Ganja from the house of the applicant, which constitutes a ‘commercial
    quantity’ under the NDPS Act, therefore, the embargo of Section 37 of the
    NDPS Act finds applicability and since the applicant has failed to satisfy
    the twin test prescribed therein, he may not be granted bail.

    9. She further submits that since it is upon the disclosure statement of
    the applicant herein that subsequent recoveries from various DTDC
    consignments/ parcels (traceable to have been dispatched by the applicant

    BAIL APPLN. 3753/2025 Page 3 of 5

    This is a digitally signed order.

    The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
    The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 28/04/2026 at 21:11:19
    herein) being 84 LSD Blots from Noida; 5006 LSD Blots from Pune; 100
    LSD Blots from Kerela and 100 LSD Blots from Chennai has been
    effectuated, it demonstrates a coordinated inter-state network for illicit
    distribution of narcotic substances, particularly LSD Blots.

    10. This Court has heard the learned counsels and perused the record.

    11. The nature and gravity of the accusations levelled against the
    applicant herein, more so, in view of the severity of the punishment
    prescribed in the event of conviction, the role attributable to him are
    severe and cannot be ignored. There is a huge recovery of 9006 LSD Blots
    and 1.116 Kg of Ganja from the house of the applicant herein, and also
    recoveries from the co-accused persons to the tune of 84 LSD Blots from
    Noida; 5006 LSD Blots from Pune; 100 LSD Blots from Kerela and 100
    LSD Blots from Chennai. These all reflect that the applicant is involved far
    and wide, all across India. Since the quantities recovered reflect/ constitute
    a ‘commercial quantity’ under the provisions of the NDPS Act, the rigours
    of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are thus attracted.

    12. This Court need not go into the alleged inconsistencies in both
    quantity and weight allegedly recovered from the applicant at the stage of
    proceedings under Section 52A of the NDPS Act, as the same are matters
    of trial.

    13. The applicant also cannot seek parity with the co-accused who have
    been granted regular bail since the role assigned to him is that of primary
    supplier of the LSD Blots. Also, the regular bail granted to the co-accused
    Shainu Hatwar was on medical grounds.

    14. In view of the overall facts and circumstances, grant of bail to the
    applicant, at this stage, is uncalled for.

    BAIL APPLN. 3753/2025 Page 4 of 5

    This is a digitally signed order.

    The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
    The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 28/04/2026 at 21:11:19

    15. Accordingly, the present application is dismissed.

    16. Needless to say, since the expression of opinion, if any, are for the
    purposes of adjudicating the present application only, they shall have no
    bearing on the overall merits/ trial involved.

    SAURABH BANERJEE, J
    APRIL 25, 2026/So/DA

    BAIL APPLN. 3753/2025 Page 5 of 5

    This is a digitally signed order.

    The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
    The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 28/04/2026 at 21:11:19



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here