ORDER : 1. The present bail application has been maintained by the petitioner, under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for grant of regular bail in case FIR No. 290/2019, dated 22.08.2019, under Section 20 of the ND & PS Act, registered at Police Station Sadar-Una, District Una, H.P. 2. As per the averments made in the petition, the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Further, she is neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice and no purpose would be served by keeping her behind the bars for an unlimited period, so she be released on bail. 3. Police report stands filed. As per the prosecution story, on 22.08.2019 a police team had laid a nakka near Indira Stadium on National Highway, leading to Chandigarh. Around 04:15 a.m. police spotted a Tata Safari car, bearing registration No. HP65-A-9898, coming from Una side and heading towards Mehatpur side, which was signaled to stop, however, the driver of the said car instead of stopping the same, reversed the vehicle and tried to flee. The said vehicle was stopped and the driver was apprehended. At the place, where the car was stopped, police spotted one Shiv Kumar Saini, who was on his routine morning walk, so he was associated as an independent witness. The driver of the vehicle was confused and on asking disclosed his name as Mahinder Singh Patiyal and the female, who was also sitting inside the vehicle, disclosed her name as Neelam (petitioner herein). In presence of the independent witness, the police checked the vehicle and found 11 bags of white cement and when the driver of the vehicle was asked about the cement bags, he could not give any satisfactory reply qua the same. Police also checked the vehicle thoroughly and found an iron sheet screwed, where the spare tyre was kept. Police opened the said iron sheet by unscrewing the iron sheet and found a bag. On opening and on being checked, it was found containing stick shaped substance kept in a polythene packet. The recovered substance was cannabis and on being weighed it was 2.630 grams. Thereafter, the police completed all the codal formalities. Personal search of accused Mahinder Singh Patiyal and the petitioner was conducted. On opening and on being checked, it was found containing stick shaped substance kept in a polythene packet. The recovered substance was cannabis and on being weighed it was 2.630 grams. Thereafter, the police completed all the codal formalities. Personal search of accused Mahinder Singh Patiyal and the petitioner was conducted. From accused Mahinder Singh Patiyal one mobile phone and from the present petitioner currency notes amounting to Rs.92,820/- (rupees ninety two thousand eight hundred twenty) were recovered. Police registered a case and the investigation ensued. Spot map was prepared and the statements of the witnesses were recorded. The petitioner was arrested. During the course of investigation it was unearthed that many cases under ND&PS Act and Excise Act have been registered against accused Mahinder Singh Patiyal and in one of the case he has been convicted. As per the police investigation, a case has been registered against the petitioner under Sections 498A and 504 IPC read with Section 34 IPC. During the course of investigation, accused Mahinder Singh Patiyal disclosed that he had purchased the contraband from one Teja at Sairopa, Great Himalayan National Park, Kullu. The recovered substance, on being chemically examined, found to be extract of cannabis. Lastly, it is prayed that the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed, as the petitioner was involved in a serious offence and huge quantity of charas was recovered from her possession and there is every possibility that in case at this stage she is enlarged on bail, she may flee from justice or tamper with the prosecution evidence. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Advocate General for the State and gone through the record, including the police report, carefully. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has further argued that the petitioner was traveling to Chandigarh for her treatment in PGI. He has argued that the alleged contraband was found in the boot space of the vehicle and she was having no knowledge about the same. He has further argued that the petitioner is not keeping good health and since there is every likelihood that trial will take some time on account of COVID-19 pandemic, the petitioner being a lady, may be released on bail. He has further argued that the petitioner is not keeping good health and since there is every likelihood that trial will take some time on account of COVID-19 pandemic, the petitioner being a lady, may be released on bail. He has argued that no fruitful purpose will be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars for an unlimited period, especially when investigation is complete and nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner. Conversely, the learned Additional Advocate General has argued that the petitioner was found involved in a serious offence, huge quantity of charas was recovered from the joint possession of the petitioner and her husband (co-accused Mahinder Singh Patiyal) and in case, at this stage, the petitioner is enlarged on bail, she may tamper with the prosecution evidence and may also flee from justice. He has prayed that the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed. 6. At this stage, taking into consideration the seriousness of the offence, the manner in which the offence is alleged to have been committed, the role of the petitioner in the commission of alleged offence, the alleged recovered quantity of the contraband, which is a commercial quantity, the fact that many cases under the ND&PS Act have been registered against accused Mahinder Singh Patiyal, who is husband of the petitioner, trial is still going on and in case at this stage petitioner is enlarged on bail, she may tamper with the prosecution evidence and may also flee from justice, so considering the overall aspects of the case, this Court finds that the present is not a fit case where the judicial discretion to admit the petitioner on bail is required to be exercised in her favour. Accordingly, the petition, which sans merits, deserves dismissal and is dismissed. 7. However, the observations made hereinabove shall not be construed to have expressed an opinion on the merits of the main case and the same shall be adjudicated on its own.