CRM-M-6602-202 108 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Sajjan alias Piddhi State of Punjab CORAM : HON'BLE MS Present: Mr. Rajiv Kumar Saini, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sahil Chowdhary, AAG Punjab. MANDEEP PANNU J. 1. This is the third petition filed Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 233 dated 14.12.2015, registered under Sections 21 and 29 of the NDPS Act and Sections 307, 399 and 402 of the IPC at Police Station Sadar Tarn Taran. 2. As per the prosecution case, the allegations against the petitioner are that he was a member of an unlawful assembly which was duly armed with deadly weapons and had assembled along with other co dacoity and other offences. I object of the unlawful assembly, the accused persons fired gunshots upon the police party with an intention to kill the members of the police party. During the operation, different police teams were fo Singh, a commercial quantity of two kilograms of heroin, drug money amounting 2025 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -.- CRM Date of Decision : Sajjan alias Piddhi VERSUS HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU Mr. Rajiv Kumar Saini, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sahil Chowdhary, AAG Punjab. -.- MANDEEP PANNU J. (Oral) This is the third petition filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 233 dated 14.12.2015, registered under Sections 21 and 29 of the NDPS Act and Sections 307, 399 and 402 of the IPC at Police Station Sadar As per the prosecution case, the allegations against the petitioner are that he was a member of an unlawful assembly which was duly armed with deadly weapons and had assembled along with other co dacoity and other offences. It is further alleged that in furtherance of the common object of the unlawful assembly, the accused persons fired gunshots upon the police party with an intention to kill the members of the police party. During the operation, different police teams were formed and from co Singh, a commercial quantity of two kilograms of heroin, drug money amounting -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-6602-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision : 05.03.2026 ....Petitioner ....Respondent MANDEEP PANNU Mr. Rajiv Kumar Saini, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sahil Chowdhary, AAG Punjab. under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 233 dated 14.12.2015, registered under Sections 21 and 29 of the NDPS Act and Sections 307, 399 and 402 of the IPC at Police Station Sadar Tarn Taran, District As per the prosecution case, the allegations against the petitioner are that he was a member of an unlawful assembly which was duly armed with deadly weapons and had assembled along with other co-accused persons for committing t is further alleged that in furtherance of the common object of the unlawful assembly, the accused persons fired gunshots upon the police party with an intention to kill the members of the police party. During the rmed and from co-accused Bhupinder Singh, a commercial quantity of two kilograms of heroin, drug money amounting under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 233 dated 14.12.2015, registered under Sections 21 and 29 of the NDPS Act and Tarn Taran, District As per the prosecution case, the allegations against the petitioner are that he was a member of an unlawful assembly which was duly armed with deadly accused persons for committing t is further alleged that in furtherance of the common object of the unlawful assembly, the accused persons fired gunshots upon the police party with an intention to kill the members of the police party. During the accused Bhupinder Singh, a commercial quantity of two kilograms of heroin, drug money amounting TRIPTI SAINI 2026.03.05 14:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-6602-202 to ₹2.5 lakhs and deadly firearms were recovered by the police team headed by Inspector Baljit Singh. 3. It is further the case of the prosecu along with co-accused Manav Singh alias Manna was apprehended by the police party headed by Inspector Hardeep Singh. From the possession of the petitioner, one country-made pistol of .315 bore along with six live cartridges bore and drug money amounting to possession of co of the same bore and drug money amounting to Similarly, co-accused Kuldeep Singh was arrested by another police party headed by SI Prabhjit Singh and from his possession one pistol of .32 bore, three live cartridges and drug money of accused Rajbir Singh sixteen liv ₹1,30,000/- were recovered. 4. It is also the case of the prosecution that earlier the petitioner had been granted the concession of bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. by the learned predecessor Court, however, th from the court proceedings and was declared a proclaimed offender vide order dated 30.11.2019. It is alleged that the petitioner did not surrender for about three years and was subsequently re that the petitioner was part of a criminal conspiracy for smuggling heroin and other offences and thus provisions of Section 29 of the NDPS Act were also attracted in the present case. 5. Learned counsel for the has been falsely implicated in the present case and has nothing to do with the 2025 (O&M) ₹2.5 lakhs and deadly firearms were recovered by the police team headed by Inspector Baljit Singh. It is further the case of the prosecu accused Manav Singh alias Manna was apprehended by the police party headed by Inspector Hardeep Singh. From the possession of the petitioner, made pistol of .315 bore along with six live cartridges bore and drug money amounting to ₹90,000/- were allegedly recovered. From the possession of co-accused Manav Singh, one pistol of .32 bore, four live cartridges of the same bore and drug money amounting to accused Kuldeep Singh was arrested by another police party headed by SI Prabhjit Singh and from his possession one pistol of .32 bore, three live cartridges and drug money of ₹1,90,000/- were recovered, whereas from co accused Rajbir Singh sixteen live cartridges of 12 bore and drug money of were recovered. t is also the case of the prosecution that earlier the petitioner had been granted the concession of bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. by the learned predecessor Court, however, thereafter the petitioner intentionally absented himself from the court proceedings and was declared a proclaimed offender vide order dated 30.11.2019. It is alleged that the petitioner did not surrender for about three years and was subsequently re-arrested. During investigation, it was also alleged that the petitioner was part of a criminal conspiracy for smuggling heroin and other offences and thus provisions of Section 29 of the NDPS Act were also attracted in the present case. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and has nothing to do with the -2- ₹2.5 lakhs and deadly firearms were recovered by the police team headed by It is further the case of the prosecution that the present petitioner accused Manav Singh alias Manna was apprehended by the police party headed by Inspector Hardeep Singh. From the possession of the petitioner, made pistol of .315 bore along with six live cartridges of the same were allegedly recovered. From the accused Manav Singh, one pistol of .32 bore, four live cartridges of the same bore and drug money amounting to ₹1,40,000/- were recovered. accused Kuldeep Singh was arrested by another police party headed by SI Prabhjit Singh and from his possession one pistol of .32 bore, three live were recovered, whereas from co e cartridges of 12 bore and drug money of t is also the case of the prosecution that earlier the petitioner had been granted the concession of bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. by the learned ereafter the petitioner intentionally absented himself from the court proceedings and was declared a proclaimed offender vide order dated 30.11.2019. It is alleged that the petitioner did not surrender for about three . During investigation, it was also alleged that the petitioner was part of a criminal conspiracy for smuggling heroin and other offences and thus provisions of Section 29 of the NDPS Act were also attracted in petitioner has contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and has nothing to do with the ₹2.5 lakhs and deadly firearms were recovered by the police team headed by tion that the present petitioner accused Manav Singh alias Manna was apprehended by the police party headed by Inspector Hardeep Singh. From the possession of the petitioner, of the same were allegedly recovered. From the accused Manav Singh, one pistol of .32 bore, four live cartridges were recovered. accused Kuldeep Singh was arrested by another police party headed by SI Prabhjit Singh and from his possession one pistol of .32 bore, three live were recovered, whereas from co- e cartridges of 12 bore and drug money of t is also the case of the prosecution that earlier the petitioner had been granted the concession of bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. by the learned ereafter the petitioner intentionally absented himself from the court proceedings and was declared a proclaimed offender vide order dated 30.11.2019. It is alleged that the petitioner did not surrender for about three . During investigation, it was also alleged that the petitioner was part of a criminal conspiracy for smuggling heroin and other offences and thus provisions of Section 29 of the NDPS Act were also attracted in petitioner has contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and has nothing to do with the TRIPTI SAINI 2026.03.05 14:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-6602-202 alleged offences. It is submitted that the petitioner is not named in the FIR and his involvement has been shown only on the basis co-accused, which has no evidentiary value in the eyes of law. It is further argued that though a country amount of ₹90,000/ petitioner has already been in custody for the last nine months and twenty days. It is further submitted that the investigation in the case has already been completed and the challan has been presented before the trial Court and have also been framed, therefore the trial is likely to take a considerable time for its conclusion. Learned counsel further submits that similarly situated co persons have already been granted the concession of bail by this Court and the petitioner is ready to abide by all the terms and conditions that may be imposed by this Court. 6. Per contra has filed the custody certificate, which is taken on record. He serious allegations have been levelled against the petitioner application of the petitioner was dismissed on account of the gravity of the offence. It is further argued that as many as 18 other criminal cases of similar nature involving offences under the NDPS Act, Arms Act and Section 307 IPC are pending against the petitioner. Therefore, considering the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and the seriousness of the allegations, he does not deserve the concession of bail. 7. I have h record carefully. 2025 (O&M) alleged offences. It is submitted that the petitioner is not named in the FIR and his involvement has been shown only on the basis accused, which has no evidentiary value in the eyes of law. It is further argued that though a country-made pistol of .315 bore along with six live cartridges and an ₹90,000/- has allegedly been recovered fro petitioner has already been in custody for the last nine months and twenty days. It is further submitted that the investigation in the case has already been completed and the challan has been presented before the trial Court and have also been framed, therefore the trial is likely to take a considerable time for its conclusion. Learned counsel further submits that similarly situated co persons have already been granted the concession of bail by this Court and the etitioner is ready to abide by all the terms and conditions that may be imposed by Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the bail application has filed the custody certificate, which is taken on record. He allegations have been levelled against the petitioner application of the petitioner was dismissed on account of the gravity of the offence. It is further argued that as many as 18 other criminal cases of similar nature offences under the NDPS Act, Arms Act and Section 307 IPC are pending against the petitioner. Therefore, considering the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and the seriousness of the allegations, he does not deserve the concession of bail. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record carefully. -3- alleged offences. It is submitted that the petitioner is not named in the FIR and his involvement has been shown only on the basis of the disclosure statement of the accused, which has no evidentiary value in the eyes of law. It is further argued made pistol of .315 bore along with six live cartridges and an has allegedly been recovered from the petitioner, the petitioner has already been in custody for the last nine months and twenty-nine days. It is further submitted that the investigation in the case has already been completed and the challan has been presented before the trial Court and charges have also been framed, therefore the trial is likely to take a considerable time for its conclusion. Learned counsel further submits that similarly situated co-accused persons have already been granted the concession of bail by this Court and the etitioner is ready to abide by all the terms and conditions that may be imposed by , learned State counsel has opposed the bail application and has filed the custody certificate, which is taken on record. He submitted that allegations have been levelled against the petitioner and earlier also the bail application of the petitioner was dismissed on account of the gravity of the offence. It is further argued that as many as 18 other criminal cases of similar nature offences under the NDPS Act, Arms Act and Section 307 IPC are pending against the petitioner. Therefore, considering the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and the seriousness of the allegations, he does not deserve the eard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the alleged offences. It is submitted that the petitioner is not named in the FIR and his of the disclosure statement of the accused, which has no evidentiary value in the eyes of law. It is further argued made pistol of .315 bore along with six live cartridges and an m the petitioner, the nine days. It is further submitted that the investigation in the case has already been charges have also been framed, therefore the trial is likely to take a considerable time for accused persons have already been granted the concession of bail by this Court and the etitioner is ready to abide by all the terms and conditions that may be imposed by and submitted that earlier also the bail application of the petitioner was dismissed on account of the gravity of the offence. It is further argued that as many as 18 other criminal cases of similar nature offences under the NDPS Act, Arms Act and Section 307 IPC are pending against the petitioner. Therefore, considering the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and the seriousness of the allegations, he does not deserve the eard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the TRIPTI SAINI 2026.03.05 14:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-6602-202 8. In the present case, serious allegations have been levelled against the petitioner. As per the prosecution case, commercial quantity of heroin was recovered from the co country-made pistol of .315 bore, six live cartridges and drug money amounting to ₹90,000/- were recovered. It has also come on record that earlier the petitioner had been granted the concession of misused the said concession and absented himself from the proceedings of the Court and was declared a proclaimed offender vide order dated 30.11.2019. The conduct of the petitioner thus does not inspire confid been brought to the notice of this Court that 18 other criminal cases of similar nature are pending against the petitioner, which reflects his criminal antecedents. 9. Considering the gravity of the allegations, the nature of effected, the past conduct of the petitioner and his involvement in multiple criminal cases, this Court is not inclined to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner. Consequently, the present petition is dismissed. 10. However, a an expression on the merits of the case during trial. 11. All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed of. March 05, 2026 tripti Whether speaking/non Whether reportable 2025 (O&M) In the present case, serious allegations have been levelled against the petitioner. As per the prosecution case, commercial quantity of heroin was recovered from the co-accused and from the possession of the present petitioner a made pistol of .315 bore, six live cartridges and drug money amounting to were recovered. It has also come on record that earlier the petitioner had been granted the concession of bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C., however he misused the said concession and absented himself from the proceedings of the Court and was declared a proclaimed offender vide order dated 30.11.2019. The conduct of the petitioner thus does not inspire confid been brought to the notice of this Court that 18 other criminal cases of similar nature are pending against the petitioner, which reflects his criminal antecedents. Considering the gravity of the allegations, the nature of effected, the past conduct of the petitioner and his involvement in multiple criminal cases, this Court is not inclined to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner. Consequently, the present petition is dismissed. However, any observation made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case during trial. All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed of. Whether speaking/non-speaking : Speaking Whether reportable : Yes/No -4- In the present case, serious allegations have been levelled against the petitioner. As per the prosecution case, commercial quantity of heroin was ccused and from the possession of the present petitioner a made pistol of .315 bore, six live cartridges and drug money amounting to were recovered. It has also come on record that earlier the petitioner had bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C., however he misused the said concession and absented himself from the proceedings of the Court and was declared a proclaimed offender vide order dated 30.11.2019. The conduct of the petitioner thus does not inspire confidence. Moreover, it has also been brought to the notice of this Court that 18 other criminal cases of similar nature are pending against the petitioner, which reflects his criminal antecedents. Considering the gravity of the allegations, the nature of the recovery effected, the past conduct of the petitioner and his involvement in multiple criminal cases, this Court is not inclined to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner. Consequently, the present petition is dismissed. ny observation made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case during trial. All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed of. (MANDEEP PANNU) JUDGE : Speaking : Yes/No In the present case, serious allegations have been levelled against the petitioner. As per the prosecution case, commercial quantity of heroin was ccused and from the possession of the present petitioner a made pistol of .315 bore, six live cartridges and drug money amounting to were recovered. It has also come on record that earlier the petitioner had bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C., however he misused the said concession and absented himself from the proceedings of the Court and was declared a proclaimed offender vide order dated 30.11.2019. The ence. Moreover, it has also been brought to the notice of this Court that 18 other criminal cases of similar nature are pending against the petitioner, which reflects his criminal antecedents. the recovery effected, the past conduct of the petitioner and his involvement in multiple criminal cases, this Court is not inclined to grant the concession of regular bail to the ny observation made hereinabove shall not be construed as All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed of. TRIPTI SAINI 2026.03.05 14:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document