Malook Singh v. State of Punjab
Case Details
IN THE THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH PUNJAB & HARYANA 218 CRM-M-63287 Date of decision: 63287-2025(O&M) decision: 17.11.2025 Malook Singh ...Petitioner VERSUS State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD VINOD S. BHARDWAJ . P.S.Ahluwalia, Senior Advocate Present :- Mr. Mr. Deepinder Singh Virk, Advocate, Mr. Advocate assisted by Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Mohit Kapoor, Sr.DAG, Punjab Mr. Punjab. ***** VINOD S. BHARDWAJ BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral) The instant second petition has been The been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case
Legal Reasoning
case bearing FIR No.200 dated 09.09.2024 09.09.2024 registered under Sections 21, 21C 21C, 27A, 29 of the Narcotic Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, Act, 1985 and Sections 25 of the Arms Act at Police Station Division No.6, District District Jalandhar. 2. The instant FIR was registered on 09.09.2024, The 09.09.2024, on the statement of ASI Gurmail Gurmail Singh, who stated that he was was patrolling in a government vehicle, when he he spotted a young man, wearing wearing a kit bag walking towards the road near Green Green Park Colony. On seeing the the police, he got scared and tried to flee away away from the spot. However, on suspicion, suspicion, he was apprehended on the spot and and he disclosed his name as Shinda Shinda Singh alias Kala. His kit bag was searched searched and recovery of 01 kg of heroin heroin as well as drug money to the tune of Rs.4,00,000/ Rs.4,00,000/- in cash was effected. SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2025.11.18 12:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 218 3. CRM-M-63287-2025(O&M) CRM 2 Learned Senior Counsel appearing Learned appearing on behalf of the petitioner inter alia raises the the following arguments:- (i) That That recovery of nearly 01kg of heroin heroin was effected from co- accused Shinda @ Kala. In his first accused first disclosure, he named 03 persons namely, Sanju, Rohit and persons and Fauji. In his second disclosure he named Harjinder Pal disclosure Singh to be the person from whom he had purchased heroin. The whom The petitioner was nominated as an accused on the disclosure statement of the abovesaid Harjinder Pal Singh to the effect Harjinder effect that he had also sold 150 grams of heroin to the petitioner. grams (ii) The The aforesaid 150 grams of herion herion (non-commercial) was recovered from the petitioner. recovered (iii) That That the petitioner was taken into into custody on 25.09.2024 and has undergone more than 01 year has year and 01 month of custody, however, till date only charges have however, ave been framed and the trial has not yet commenced. has (iv) That That there are total 16 witnesses that have been cited by the prosecution rosecution out of which none have have been examined so far, thus, the trial is likely to take a long time time to conclude. (v) That That the petitioner had earlier approached approached this Court for seeking concession of regular bail vide concession CRM-M-14868-2025 titled ‘Malook Singh Vs. State of Punjab’ ‘Malook Punjab’ which was however dismissed on 24.03.2025. Against dismissed the said order of dismissal, the petitioner had approached the Hon’ble Hon’ble Supreme Court vide Petition for Special Leave to Appeal Petition Appeal (Crl.) No(s).5764/2025. SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2025.11.18 12:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Decision
The said petition was disposed of The with liberty to the petitioner 218 CRM-M-63287-2025(O&M) CRM 3 to file file a renewed petition for grant grant of bail after the charges are framed. framed (vi) That That the charges have since then then been framed against the petitioner on 03.09.2025. petitioner (vii) That That in view of the recovered quantity quantity being non-commercial and the petitioner having undergone and undergone an actual custody of more than 01 year and 01 month, he would than would thus be entitled for grant of bail. bail. 4. Learned State Counsel however contends Learned contends that the petitioner is part of a crime syndicate and has been dealing dealing in contraband. He submits that there are two two more cases against the petitioner. petitioner. He, however, is not in a position to dispute ute the period of custody and that that the recovered quantity is non-commercial commercial and the trial is yet to commence. commence. 5. Responding to the above, learned Senior Responding Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner petitioner contends that in one of the two cases registered against the petitioner, petitioner, the recovered quantity was again non-commercial weighing 150 grams grams of heroin while in the other other case, the petitioner has been nominated as an an accused on the basis of disclosure disclosure statement of co-accused and no actual recovery recovery has been effected from the the petitioner. Moreover, he is already on bail under under those cases. 6. I have have heard learned counsel for the the respective parties and have gone through the the documents appended along with with the present petition. 7. Taking into consideration the age Taking age of the petitioner, that the period of custody custody is more than 01 year and 01 month; the stage of the trial which is yet to commence commence and not likely to conclude conclude soon coupled with the SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2025.11.18 12:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document fact that the recovered recovered quantity is non-commercial commercial, I deem it appropriate to 218 CRM-M-63287-2025(O&M) CRM allow the present present petition. 4 8. Accordingly, the instant petition is Accordingly, allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be admitted admitted to regular bail subject to his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Illaqa Magistrate concerned. 9. It is is made clear that the petitioner petitioner shall not extend any threat and shall not influence influence any prosecution witness witness in any manner directly or indirectly. 10. The observation made hereinabove The hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression on the the merits of the case and the trial trial Court shall decide the case on the basis of available available material. 11. Pending application(s), if any, shall Pending shall stand disposed of. 17.11.2025 Sumit Gusain (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) (VINOD JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned speaking/reasoned reportable Whether reportable : : Yes/No Yes/No SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2025.11.18 12:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document