Recently, the Punjab and Haryana High Court declined bail to a woman accused under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act), while issuing significant directions to curb cross-border drug trafficking. Justice Anoop Chitkara observed that the case was one among the "ever-increasing cases under the NDPS Act, 1985," and noted with concern that "these days, the trend of heroin being smuggled by the Indian Drugs Mafia from Pakistan’s border is also more noticeable."
The case stemmed from the seizure of 1 kg of heroin from a co-accused. During the investigation, disclosures linked the petitioner to the narcotics network allegedly operated by one Lucky, currently residing in the United States. Digital evidence was said to connect her with the supply chain.
The petitioner, who approached the Court under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, sought bail on the grounds of gender and length of custody, while the State opposed the plea by stressing her extensive criminal antecedents under the NDPS Act and the involvement of a commercial quantity.
The Court emphasized that the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act apply in cases involving commercial quantity. It observed, "The petitioner has not stated anything in the bail petition to discharge the burden put by the stringent conditions placed in the statute by the legislature under Section 37 of the NDPS Act."
The Court clarified that the statutory concession available to women cannot be invoked automatically in such cases. "Although the legislature has provided a separate category for women, that category would not be automatically applicable, given the serious nature of the offence, coupled with a criminal history," the Court held.
On the issue of custody, the Court ruled that nine months of detention could not be treated as prolonged when the alleged recovery was four times the commercial quantity, particularly given the petitioner’s prior conviction and multiple pending FIRs.
In a rare move, the Court went beyond the individual bail application to address the systemic issue of cross-border drug smuggling. It directed, "Whenever there is any involvement of foreign Nationals operating from foreign land, or drugs operations from outside India, when the quantity of drugs is significant, the senior officers from the rank of SSP and above must communicate the gist of investigation along with the information about such foreign National to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs."
The Bench further directed that the concerned SSP/Commissioner of Police share the particulars of the foreign-based individual with the Ministry of External Affairs for onward communication with authorities abroad. Copies of the order were also directed to be forwarded to the DGPs of Punjab, Haryana, and Chandigarh.
While dismissing the bail plea, the Court granted liberty to the petitioner to renew her application if the trial remains pending beyond three years of custody, provided the delay is not attributable to her.
Case Title: Seema Vs. State of Punjab
Case No: CRM-M-28659-2025
Coram: . Justice Anoop Chitkara
Advocate for Petitioner: Adv. Suram Singh Rana
Advocate for Respondent: AAG, Akshay Kumar
Picture Source :