The High Court
Case Details
CRM-M- -44467-2025 1- -1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF AT CHANDIG T OF PUNJAB & HARYANA NDIGARH 227 CRM-M-44467-2025 .2025 Date of decision: 31.10.2025 Harjinder S nder Singh @ Jinder State of Pun Punjab Versus ...Petitioner ...Respondent CORAM: AM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE AA AARADHNA SAWHNEY Present : Mr. Ketan Chopta, Advocate f ocate for the petitioner. Mr. Gautam Thapar, Senior DA nior DAG, Punjab. ***** AARADHN ADHNA SAWHNEY, J.(ORAL) 1. Petitioner, an accused, in cas in case FIR No. 25 dated 20.02.202 2.2024, under Secti r Section 18, 27, 29 of the Narcotic Dr otic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance bstances (NDPS), A S), Act 1985, registered against him t him at Police Station GRP, Ludhian dhiana, has filed th iled the present 3rd petition for grant of of regular bail. 2. Relevant facts as emerging rging from documents on record b cord be noticed her ed hereinbelow:- On 10.10.2024, a police team team headed by Inspector Palwind inder Singh, Inch Incharge CIA-I Staff, GRP, Punjab njab, camp at Ludhiana was prese resent on Laddow dowal side at Railway Station, Lud Ludhiana, on routine patrolling dut duty. When they they saw a person carrying a bag c ag coming towards platform Nos.2 s.2-3, who on see n seeing the police party tried to run o run away. On account of suspicio picion having ar arisen, the person was appreh prehended. When questioned, h d, he introduced ced himself as Satayadev Teeru son u son of Late Surinder Teeru, reside sident of village E ge Ethe, PS Murhu, District Khunti unti (Jharkhand). After the statuto tutory GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.06 17:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- -44467-2025 2- -2 formalities ities were completed, 15 kgs. opium ium was recovered from his bag. Tw Two sample par parcels containing 25 grams opiu opium each were prepared and we were sealed. Pr . Primarily with this backdrop, a fo
Legal Reasoning
a formal case vide FIR No. 25 date dated 20.02.2024 2024, was registered against petitio titioner, under Section 18, 27, 29 29 of NDPS, Act , Act at Police Station GRP, Ludhian hiana. Accused Satyadev Teeru also also got recovered a mobile phon phone handset be t bearing two sim cards. The hands andset and sim cards were also take taken into posses ossession. The case property was was deposited with MHC. Durin uring interrogati gation, accused Satyadev disclosed losed that the contraband had bee been supplied by d by Gurudayal Singh, who was a as a well knowl peddler of the are area. Further, a r, according to him, Kuldeep Sing Singh @ Deepa was to receive th ve the supply of of opium. It is further the case of p of prosecution that call detail record ecords and bank s nk statements of Gurudayal Singh w gh were checked when it came to th to the notice of I of Investigating Officer that frequ requent transactions had been mad made with Kulde uldeep Singh @ Deepa and Harjind rjinder Singh @ Jinder. Resultantl tantly, the aforesa resaid two persons, namely, Kulde uldeep Singh @ Deepa and prese resent petitioner w ner were nominated as accused and o and offence under Section 29 of NDP NDPS Act was ad s added. On 30.7.2024, petitioner was was arrested. His dope test cam came positive an e and accordingly, Section 27 of ND f NDPS Act was added. Statements ents of witnesses w ses were recorded. On culminati ination of investigation qua prese resent petitioner, ner, challan was filed on 6.11.202 1.2024. The others involved in th in the incident w t were also arrested on vario arious dates including co-accuse cused Gurudayal ayal Singh, who was in custody in a in another case bearing FIR No. 3 o. 36 dated 4.4.2 4.4.2025, registered under Section 1 ion 18 of NDPS Act, at Police Statio tation Jalandhar har Cantt. GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.06 17:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- -44467-2025 3- -3 Petitioner accused who was a as arrested on the basis of disclosu losure statement o ent of co-accused Gurudayal Singh ingh filed an application for grant ant of bail before efore the Judge, Special Court, Lu t, Ludhiana. The same came to b to be dismissed v sed vide order dated 30.9.2024. Admittedly, this is the 3rd bail bail application filed by the petition itioner before this this Court. Earlier, two bail ail applications were dismissed a ed as withdrawn awn vide orders dated 25.10.2024 an 4 and 13.5.2025. 3. Learned counsel for the petit e petitioner submits that petitioner ha ner has been falsel falsely implicated only on the basi t of co- e basis of disclosure statement of co accused Gu sed Gurudayal Singh, who was alleg allegedly apprehended keeping in h g in his illegal poss al possession 15 kgs of opium. Pur . Pursuant to arrest of petitioner, n , no recovery was effected. Prosecution is rel is relying upon the CCTV footage o otage of ATM whic which otherwise also does not conne connect petitioner with the commissio mission of offence. fence. Moreover, the veracity thereof thereof would be adjudicated upon on on only after evide evidence is led. Further, since, ince, the withdrawal of second ba nd bail application cation on 13.5.2025, charges have bee ve been framed, but out of 28 witnesse itnesses, none has be has been examined till date. Thus, hus, likelihood of completion of trial f trial in the near fut ear future is quite remote, further inca er incarceration of petitioner in custod custody, would not d not serve any useful purpose a ose and would also be violative o ative of fundamenta amental rights guaranteed under Articl Article 21 of the Constitution of Indi f India. It has thus s thus been prayed to take lenient vie nt view in petitioner’s favour, who ha who has been in cus in custody since 30.07.2024, by exten y extending him the concession of bai of bail, moreso wh so when he is not involved in any othe y other case. 4. Status report by way of affida S, DSP, affidavit of Tej Pal Singh, PPS, DSP Zonal GRP l GRP, Ludhiana has been filed. Op Opposing the petition, learned Sta ed State Counsel su sel submits that petitioner is a smugg smuggler of opium. He and co-accuse accused GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.06 17:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- -44467-2025 4- -4 supply the ly the opium on large scale to the pe the people. According to learned Sta ed State counsel, if sel, if concession of bail is granted to p ted to petitioner, he would again indulg indulge in smugglin uggling contraband. Dismissal of the p of the petition has been prayed for. 5. I have heard the learned coun counsel for the parties and have gon ve gone through the gh the documents on record. 6. Factual aspects leading to th to the registration of the FIR hav R have already bee dy been noticed in para 2 of the order. order. As per case set up b up by prosecution cution, petitioner was not arrested at s ted at site, he has arrayed as accused o used on string of g of disclosure statements. In view view of the submissions advanced b nced by learned cou ed counsel for the petitioner, but with t without commenting on the merits o erits of the case, th ase, the fact that the petitioner has b has been in custody since 30.07.202 .2024, investigatio tigations qua him are complete, as for for challan has already been filed, filed, as also taking taking note of the fact that out of 28 28 prosecution witnesses, none one has been exam examined till date, thus, possibility o bility of completion of trial in the ne the near future is qu e is quite remote, lenient view be tak taken in favour of petitioner who who is not involve nvolved in any other criminal case, by by extending him concession of bai bail, for his furt is further incarceration would not onl ot only be violative of his rights und ts under Article 21 le 21 of the Constitution of India, in , including right to speedy trial b trial but would also d also be against the principle of ple of “Bail is a general rule an e and incarcerati eration is an exception” as held b held by Hon’ble Supreme Court ourt in Dataram v m v. State of Uttar Pradesh and a nd another, 2018(2) RCR (Crimina minal) 131. 7. Resultantly, in view of discu discussion made above, petitioner ioner is granted the ted the concession of bail subject to h ct to his furnishing bail bond with tw ith two local suret sureties to the satisfaction of lear f learned trial Court/Duty Magistra agistrate concerned. erned. The petitioner shall abide by the by the following conditions:- GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.06 17:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- -44467-2025 5- -5 (i) The petitioner shall not permission of the trial Court the trial Court. (ii) The petitioner will not tam trial. (iii) The petitioner will prosecution witnesses. (iv) The petitioner will appea and every date fixed, unless i Court. (v) The petitioner shall not offence of which, he is an acc he is suspected of. (vi) The petitioner shall no induce, threaten or promise to facts of the case so as to dissu facts to the Court or to any evidence in any manner. (vii) The petitioner shall not in (viii) The petitioner shall f number to the Trial Court fo same till the conclusion of the the petitioner seeks to chang shall be done only with prio Court, stating the reason for th (ix) The trial Court/Duty M condition, as deemed appropri not leave the country without prio ourt and shall deposit the passport prior ort in t tamper with the evidence during th ng the ill not pressurize/ e intimidate the th ppear before the trial Court on eac ess is exempted by a specific order each der of not commit an offence similar to th accused, or for commission of whic to the which l not directly or indirectly coerc ise to any person acquainted with th dissuade him/her from disclosing suc any police officer or tamper with th oerce, ith the g such ith the rty. ot in any manner misuse his liberty. obile ll furnish his address and mobi ge the rt forthwith and shall not change th eason, f the trial and in case for any reaso same ange any of the aforesaid, the sam Trial prior intimation to the learned Tri for the same. y Magistrate may impose any oth ropriate while releasing the petitione other tioner. 8. Accordingly, the present petiti t petition is allowed and it is made cle de clear that in case in case there is any breach of the afore e aforesaid conditions, the State shall b shall be at liberty t erty to seek cancellation of bail as ail as granted to the petitioner by th by this order. 9.
Decision
In view of the above, it is cla t is clarified that the observations mad ns made herein are l n are limited for the purpose of prese f present proceedings and would not b d not be construed a trued as an opinion on the merits of the s of the case and the trial would procee proceed independen endently of the aforesaid observations ations. .2025 31.10.2025 gbs (AARADHNA SAWHNEY NEY) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable : : Yes / No Yes / No GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.06 17:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document