✦ High Court of India

The High Court

Case Details

CRM-M No.65627 of 2025 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 238 ***** CRM-M No.65627 of 2025 Date of decision : 9.12.2025 Date of uploading : 10.12.2025 Sajanpreet Singh ………….Petitioner State of Punjab …….Respondent Versus

Legal Reasoning

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. J.S. Sandhu, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. Hemant Aggarwal, AAG, Punjab --- SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL) 1. Present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.39 dated 20.5.2025 under Sections 18(C), 27-A and 29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, registered at Police Station Majitha Road, District Amritsar. 2. The gravamen of the FIR in question is that the petitioner is an accused of being involved in FIR pertaining to NDPS Act involving 01 Kg. opium allegedly recovered from the co-accused and ₹4,37,000/- drug money allegedly recovered from the petitioner, on 20.5.2025 in the area near Mental Hospital, Bank Side, Trilium Mall, Amritsar. 3. ASHWANI KUMAR 2025.12.10 10:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner CRM-M No.65627 of 2025 -2- is in custody since 20.5.2025. Learned counsel has further argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question. Learned counsel has further argued that, in any case, the contraband of 01 Kg. of opium recovered from the petitioner, is non-commercial in nature. Learned counsel has further argued that the prime basis of terming the recovery of ₹4,37,000/- from the petitioner as drug money is the disclosure statement of the petitioner himself, which is untenable in law. Learned counsel has further iterated that the petitioner is a man with clean antecedents. Thus, regular bail is prayed for. 4. Learned State counsel has opposed the present petition by arguing that the allegations raised are serious in nature and thus the petitioner does not deserve the concession of the regular bail. Learned State counsel has further iterated that the petitioner is accused of offence pertaining to commercial quantity under the NDPS Act, and thus, his bail petition is barred in view of the Section 37 of the Act. Learned State counsel seeks to place on record custody certificate dated 8.12.2025 in Court, which is taken on record. 5. I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the available records of the case. 6. The petitioner was arrested on 20.5.2025 wherein after investigation was carried out and challan stands presented on 3.12.2025. Total 14 prosecution witnesses have been cited, but none has been examined till date. It is thus indubitable that culmination of trial will take its own time. The rival contentions raised by learned counsel give rise to ASHWANI KUMAR 2025.12.10 10:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.65627 of 2025 -3- debatable issues which shall be ratiocinated upon during the course of trial. It is a matter of trial that the money which has been recovered from the petitioner can be termed as drug money as the basis thereof appears to be primarily the confessional/disclosure statement of the petitioner. This Court does not deem it appropriate to delve deep into these rival contentions, at this stage, lest it may prejudice the trial. Nothing tangible has been brought forward to indicate the likelihood of the petitioner absconding from the process of justice or interfering with the prosecution evidence. As per custody certificate dated 8.12.2025 filed by learned State counsel, the petitioner has already suffered incarceration for a period of 6 months and 16 days & is not shown to be involved in any other case. Suffice to say, further detention of the petitioner as an undertrial is not warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case. 7. In view of above, the present petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Ld. concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate. However, in addition to conditions that may be imposed by the concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate, the petitioner shall remain bound by the following conditions:- (i) The petitioner shall not mis-use the liberty granted. (ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with any evidence, oral or documentary, during the trial. (iii) The petitioner shall not absent himself on any date before the trial. (iv) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail. (v) The petitioner shall deposit his passport, if any, with the trial Court. ASHWANI KUMAR 2025.12.10 10:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M No.65627 of 2025 -4- (vi) The petitioner shall give his cell-phone number to the Investigating Officer/SHO of concerned Police Station and shall not change his cell-phone number without prior permission of the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate. (vii) The petitioner shall not in any manner try to delay the trial. (viii) The petitioner shall submit, on the first working day of every month, an affidavit, before the concerned trial Court, to the effect that he has not been involved in commission of any offence after being released on bail. In case the petitioner is found to be involved in any offence after his being enlarged on bail in the present FIR, on the basis of his affidavit or otherwise, the State is mandated to move, forthwith, for cancellation of his bail which plea, but of course, shall be ratiocinated upon merits thereof. 8. In case of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions and those which may be imposed by concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate as directed hereinabove or upon showing any other sufficient cause, the State/complainant shall be at liberty to move cancellation of bail of the petitioner. 9. 10. Ordered accordingly. Nothing said hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. (SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE 9.12.2025 Ashwanii Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable: Yes/No Yes/No ASHWANI KUMAR 2025.12.10 10:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments