CRM-M-11988- 230 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Palwinder Singh alias Gaggar State of Punjab CORAM : HON'BLE MS Present: Mr. Prabhpreet Singh, Advocate and Mr. Sehajpreet Singh Sandhu Mr. MANDEEP PANNU J. 1. This is Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 concession of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. registered under Section the NDPS Act added later) Commissionerate Amritsar 2. As per the prosecution version, HC Satnam Singh got recorded a statement to the effect that on 23.07.2025 at about 03:00 Chowk, Ranjit Avenue, Amritsar, accused Amit Sharma @ Veeru son of Rajiv Kumar was apprehended while being in consciou 21 grams. A sum of Rs.1000/ his possession. During the course of investigation, the said accused suffered a disclosure statement to the effect that he had purchased 50 grams -2026 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -.- CRM Date of Decision : Palwinder Singh alias Gaggar VERSUS HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU Mr. Prabhpreet Singh, Advocate and . Sehajpreet Singh Sandhu, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. H.S.Wadhwa, DAG Punjab. -.- MANDEEP PANNU J. (Oral) This is the first petition filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C) concession of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. registered under Section 21(b), 27(a), 61 and 85 of the NDPS the NDPS Act added later) at Police Station Commissionerate Amritsar, District Amritsar. As per the prosecution version, HC Satnam Singh got recorded a statement to the effect that on 23.07.2025 at about 03:00 Chowk, Ranjit Avenue, Amritsar, accused Amit Sharma @ Veeru son of Rajiv Kumar was apprehended while being in consciou 21 grams. A sum of Rs.1000/- alleged to be drug money was also recovered from his possession. During the course of investigation, the said accused suffered a disclosure statement to the effect that he had purchased 50 grams -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-11988-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision : 11.03.2026 ....Petitioner ....Respondent MANDEEP PANNU Mr. Prabhpreet Singh, Advocate and , Advocate for the petitioner. petition filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C) for grant of the concession of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.99, dated 23.07.2025 (b), 27(a), 61 and 85 of the NDPS Act (Section 29 at Police Station Ranjit Avenue, Police As per the prosecution version, HC Satnam Singh got recorded a statement to the effect that on 23.07.2025 at about 03:00–04:00 PM near PR Chowk, Ranjit Avenue, Amritsar, accused Amit Sharma @ Veeru son of Rajiv Kumar was apprehended while being in conscious possession of heroin weighing alleged to be drug money was also recovered from his possession. During the course of investigation, the said accused suffered a disclosure statement to the effect that he had purchased 50 grams of heroin from petition filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya for grant of the 23.07.2025, 29 of Ranjit Avenue, Police As per the prosecution version, HC Satnam Singh got recorded a 04:00 PM near PR Chowk, Ranjit Avenue, Amritsar, accused Amit Sharma @ Veeru son of Rajiv s possession of heroin weighing alleged to be drug money was also recovered from his possession. During the course of investigation, the said accused suffered a of heroin from TRIPTI SAINI 2026.03.11 18:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-11988- the present petitioner Palwinder Singh @ Ghuggar and Aman son of Prem prior to their arrest in another case and that some part of the heroin had already been sold by him while the remaining quantity of 21 grams along with drug money was recovered from his possession. On the basis of the said disclosure statement, the present petitioner and co Rapat No.45 dated 23.07.2025. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner falsely implicated in the present case and has been nominated only during the course of investigation on the basis of the disclosure statement of co Sharma @ Veeru. It is further submitted that no recovery has been effected from the petitioner and the alleged quantity recovered in the present case is 21 grams of heroin, which falls within non submits that the petitioner is in custody since 29.07.2025. It is also contended that co-accused Ami concession of regular bail by this Court and therefore the petitioner also deserves the concession of bail on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the of regular bail and submits that the petitioner was involved in supplying heroin and has been nominated during investigation on the basis of the disclosure statement of the co-accused. It is further submitted that the offence under the NDP serious in nature and the petitioner is also involved in another case under the NDPS Act registered at the same police station. learned State counsel today in Court, is taken on record. 5. I have heard learned co record. -2026 (O&M) the present petitioner Palwinder Singh @ Ghuggar and Aman son of Prem prior to their arrest in another case and that some part of the heroin had already been sold by him while the remaining quantity of 21 grams along with drug money was vered from his possession. On the basis of the said disclosure statement, the present petitioner and co-accused Aman were nominated as additional accused vide Rapat No.45 dated 23.07.2025. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner falsely implicated in the present case and has been nominated only during the course of investigation on the basis of the disclosure statement of co Sharma @ Veeru. It is further submitted that no recovery has been effected from etitioner and the alleged quantity recovered in the present case is 21 grams of heroin, which falls within non-commercial quantity. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is in custody since 29.07.2025. It is also contended that accused Amit Sharma @ Veeru as well as Aman have already been granted the concession of regular bail by this Court and therefore the petitioner also deserves the concession of bail on the ground of parity. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the of regular bail and submits that the petitioner was involved in supplying heroin and has been nominated during investigation on the basis of the disclosure statement of accused. It is further submitted that the offence under the NDP serious in nature and the petitioner is also involved in another case under the NDPS Act registered at the same police station. learned State counsel today in Court, is taken on record. have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the -2- the present petitioner Palwinder Singh @ Ghuggar and Aman son of Prem prior to their arrest in another case and that some part of the heroin had already been sold by him while the remaining quantity of 21 grams along with drug money was vered from his possession. On the basis of the said disclosure statement, the accused Aman were nominated as additional accused vide Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and has been nominated only during the course of investigation on the basis of the disclosure statement of co-accused Amit Sharma @ Veeru. It is further submitted that no recovery has been effected from etitioner and the alleged quantity recovered in the present case is 21 grams of commercial quantity. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is in custody since 29.07.2025. It is also contended that t Sharma @ Veeru as well as Aman have already been granted the concession of regular bail by this Court and therefore the petitioner also deserves On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of regular bail and submits that the petitioner was involved in supplying heroin and has been nominated during investigation on the basis of the disclosure statement of accused. It is further submitted that the offence under the NDPS Act is serious in nature and the petitioner is also involved in another case under the NDPS Act registered at the same police station. Custody certificate filed by the learned State counsel today in Court, is taken on record. unsel for the parties and have perused the the present petitioner Palwinder Singh @ Ghuggar and Aman son of Prem prior to their arrest in another case and that some part of the heroin had already been sold by him while the remaining quantity of 21 grams along with drug money was vered from his possession. On the basis of the said disclosure statement, the accused Aman were nominated as additional accused vide has been falsely implicated in the present case and has been nominated only during the accused Amit Sharma @ Veeru. It is further submitted that no recovery has been effected from etitioner and the alleged quantity recovered in the present case is 21 grams of commercial quantity. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is in custody since 29.07.2025. It is also contended that t Sharma @ Veeru as well as Aman have already been granted the concession of regular bail by this Court and therefore the petitioner also deserves prayer for grant of regular bail and submits that the petitioner was involved in supplying heroin and has been nominated during investigation on the basis of the disclosure statement of S Act is serious in nature and the petitioner is also involved in another case under the Custody certificate filed by the unsel for the parties and have perused the TRIPTI SAINI 2026.03.11 18:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-11988- 6. It is not disputed that the petitioner has been nominated in the present case on the basis of the disclosure statement of co and no recovery has been effected from the petit case is of 21 grams of heroin from the co accused Amit Sharma @ Veeru and Aman have already been granted the concession of regular bail by a co 7. The evidentiary value of a disclosure statement of a co absence of recovery or corroboration is weak in view of the settled position of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in ‘ Haryana’, bearing Special Le 17.05.2023' has held as under: "The petitioner is alleged to have committed offences under Sections 15 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter called the NDPS Act)". H anticipatory bail was rejected by the High Court. The allegations in the FIR are that 1.7 Kg of Poppy Straw (Doda Post) was recovered from the co was not present at the spot but was named by the co apart there is no other material to implicate the petitioner. The prosecution urges that another case with allegations of commission of offence under the NDPS Act are pending against the petitioner. It is not denied that in those proceedings he w regard to these circumstances, the petitioner is directed to the enlarged on anticipatory bail, subject to such terms and conditions as the trial Court may impose. The petition is allowed.” 8. The petitioner is in custody since 29.07.2025 and the trial of the case is likely to take some time to conclude. Without commenting upon the merits of the case and considering the period of custody already undergone by the petitioner -2026 (O&M) It is not disputed that the petitioner has been nominated in the present case on the basis of the disclosure statement of co and no recovery has been effected from the petit case is of 21 grams of heroin from the co-accused. It is also not in dispute that co accused Amit Sharma @ Veeru and Aman have already been granted the concession of regular bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court. The evidentiary value of a disclosure statement of a co absence of recovery or corroboration is weak in view of the settled position of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in ‘ Haryana’, bearing Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.(s) 1266/2023 decided on has held as under: The petitioner is alleged to have committed offences under Sections 15 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter called the NDPS Act)". H anticipatory bail was rejected by the High Court. The allegations in the FIR are that 1.7 Kg of Poppy Straw (Doda Post) was recovered from the co-accused. The petitioner concededly was not present at the spot but was named by the co apart there is no other material to implicate the petitioner. The prosecution urges that another case with allegations of commission of offence under the NDPS Act are pending against the petitioner. It is not denied that in those proceedings he w regard to these circumstances, the petitioner is directed to the enlarged on anticipatory bail, subject to such terms and conditions as the trial Court may impose. The petition is allowed.” The petitioner is in custody since 29.07.2025 and the trial of the case is likely to take some time to conclude. Without commenting upon the merits of the case and considering the period of custody already undergone by the petitioner -3- It is not disputed that the petitioner has been nominated in the present case on the basis of the disclosure statement of co-accused Amit Sharma @ Veeru and no recovery has been effected from the petitioner. The recovery in the present accused. It is also not in dispute that co accused Amit Sharma @ Veeru and Aman have already been granted the ordinate Bench of this Court. The evidentiary value of a disclosure statement of a co-accused, in the absence of recovery or corroboration is weak in view of the settled position of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in ‘Vijay Singh vs. The State of ave to Appeal (Crl.) No.(s) 1266/2023 decided on The petitioner is alleged to have committed offences under Sections 15 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter called the NDPS Act)". His application for anticipatory bail was rejected by the High Court. The allegations in the FIR are that 1.7 Kg of Poppy Straw (Doda accused. The petitioner concededly was not present at the spot but was named by the co-accused. That apart there is no other material to implicate the petitioner. The prosecution urges that another case with allegations of commission of offence under the NDPS Act are pending against the petitioner. It is not denied that in those proceedings he was granted bail. Having regard to these circumstances, the petitioner is directed to the enlarged on anticipatory bail, subject to such terms and conditions as the trial Court may impose. The petition is allowed.” The petitioner is in custody since 29.07.2025 and the trial of the case is likely to take some time to conclude. Without commenting upon the merits of the case and considering the period of custody already undergone by the petitioner It is not disputed that the petitioner has been nominated in the present accused Amit Sharma @ Veeru ioner. The recovery in the present accused. It is also not in dispute that co- accused Amit Sharma @ Veeru and Aman have already been granted the accused, in the absence of recovery or corroboration is weak in view of the settled position of law Vijay Singh vs. The State of ave to Appeal (Crl.) No.(s) 1266/2023 decided on The petitioner is alleged to have committed offences under Sections 15 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, is application for The allegations in the FIR are that 1.7 Kg of Poppy Straw (Doda accused. The petitioner concededly sed. That apart there is no other material to implicate the petitioner. The prosecution urges that another case with allegations of commission of offence under the NDPS Act are pending against the petitioner. It is as granted bail. Having regard to these circumstances, the petitioner is directed to the enlarged on anticipatory bail, subject to such terms and conditions as The petitioner is in custody since 29.07.2025 and the trial of the case is likely to take some time to conclude. Without commenting upon the merits of the case and considering the period of custody already undergone by the petitioner TRIPTI SAINI 2026.03.11 18:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-11988- as well as the fact th this Court is of the view that further incarceration of the petitioner would serve no useful purpose. 9. Consequently, the present petition is namely Palwinder Sing subject to his furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. 10. However, nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 11. All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed of. March 11, 2026 tripti Whether speaking/non Whether reportable -2026 (O&M) as well as the fact that similarly placed co-accused have already been granted bail, this Court is of the view that further incarceration of the petitioner would serve no Consequently, the present petition is namely Palwinder Singh @ Ghuggar, is ordered to be released on subject to his furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. However, nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed as an xpression of opinion on the merits of the case. All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed of. Whether speaking/non-speaking : Speaking Whether reportable : Yes/No -4- accused have already been granted bail, this Court is of the view that further incarceration of the petitioner would serve no Consequently, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner, h @ Ghuggar, is ordered to be released on regular bail subject to his furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the However, nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed as an All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed of. (MANDEEP PANNU) JUDGE : Speaking : Yes/No accused have already been granted bail, this Court is of the view that further incarceration of the petitioner would serve no and the petitioner, regular bail, subject to his furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the However, nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed as an All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed of. TRIPTI SAINI 2026.03.11 18:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document