Punjab & Haryana High Court Dismisses Bail Pleas in Commercial Quantity NDPS Case; Holds Section 37 Rigours Attracted
Case Name: Aashish Verma and Others v. Union of India (NCB)
Date of Judgment: 11 February 2026
Citation: CRM-M-46779-2025
Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sumeet Goel
Held: The Punjab and Haryana High Court held that where recovery involves commercial quantity of psychotropic substances and material on record discloses prima facie involvement of accused in manufacturing, marketing and diversion of NRx medicines, the statutory embargo under Section 37 of the NDPS Act applies. Bail cannot be granted unless twin conditions under Section 37 are satisfied.
Summary: Eight connected petitions were filed seeking regular bail in NCB Crime Case No.51 dated 08.12.2024 registered under Sections 8, 22, 25, 27-A, 29 and allied provisions of the NDPS Act. The case pertained to recovery of commercial quantity of psychotropic tablets including Alprazolam, Tramadol and Zolpidem.
Petitioners argued that they were licensed manufacturers or distributors under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act and that mandatory provisions were not complied with. Some contended that their implication was based solely on disclosure statements. It was also argued that trial had not commenced and incarceration was prolonged.
The NCB opposed the petitions, submitting that recoveries were of commercial quantity and that investigation revealed coordinated diversion of NRx medicines into black market. Voluntary statements under Section 67 NDPS Act and digital evidence were relied upon. Licences of certain firms were also stated to have been cancelled.
The Court observed that the quantity recovered was commercial and thus Section 37 NDPS Act was attracted. It held that at the stage of bail, the Court must be satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the accused is not guilty and is unlikely to commit an offence while on bail. Considering the material on record and the scale of alleged diversion, the Court found that the twin conditions were not satisfied.
Decision: All petitions were dismissed. The petitioners were denied regular bail.