CRM-M-13301-2025 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 227 CRM-M-13301-2025 (O&M) Date of decision : 25.07.2025 Harjeet Singh @ Jeeta ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present:- Mr. Hitesh Chopra, Advocate and Mr. Amit Kumar Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab. MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral) 1. The instant one is the second petition that has been filed by the petitioner under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to him in case arising out of FIR No. 11 dated 09.03.2024, registered under Sections 21(C), 29 and 27-A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’), Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 and Sections 10, 11, 12 of the Aircraft Act, 1934 at Police Station Dorangla, District Gurdaspur. The first petition, bearing number CRM-M-42017-2024, was dismissed by this Court on 12.11.2024. 2. The petitioner has been arraigned as an accused in the aforementioned FIR on the basis of the disclosure statement suffered by co- accused Harmeet Singh, wherein he disclosed that on the instructions of the petitioner, two pistols were given to two unknown persons at Dana Mandi, Batala. Initially co-accused Gurjeet Singh @ Kalu and Satnam Singh were apprehended by a police party on 09.03.2024 and recovery of one pistol and four MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.07.28 09:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-13301-2025 (O&M) -2- live cartridges were recovered from Gurjeet Singh and from Satnam Singh, 405 grams of heroin was recovered. Thereafter, during the course of investigation, several other persons including co-accused Harmeet Singh were nominated in this case. After completion of necessary investigation and usual formalities, challan was presented in the Court and presently, the petitioner along with co- accused is facing trial for commission of aforementioned offences. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He was neither named in the FIR nor was found at the spot. He has been implicated in this case on the basis of the disclosure statement suffered by above named co-accused, which is not admissible in evidence. No subsequent recovery has been effected from the petitioner. Even otherwise, investigation has since been completed and challan has been filed. The petitioner is in custody since long. Conclusion of trial is likely to take a long time as no witness has been examined so far. No useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody anymore. Similarly situated co-accused Harpreet Singh @ Happy, Ranjodh Singh @ Jodha and Satinder Singh @ Kala have already been granted concession of regular bail by this Court, vide orders dated 19.05.2025 and 09.07.2025 passed in CRM-M-7053-2025, CRM-M-32320-2024 and CRM-M-15537-2025, respectively. On the grounds of parity, the petitioners too deserve the same benefit. It is, therefore, urged that the petitions deserve to be allowed. 4. Separate status report has been filed by the respondent-State. It is submitted therein and learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab has argued keeping in view the gravity of the allegations levelled against the petitioner, he is not entitled to get benefit of bail. It is, thus, argued that the petitions are liable MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.07.28 09:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-13301-2025 (O&M) -3- to be dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at considerable length and have also perused the material placed on record. 6. The petitioner is in custody since 16.03.2024. No subsequent recovery is shown to have been effected from him. In fact, he was in jail when he was nominated in this case. Similarly situated three co-accused have already been granted concession of regular bail by this Court, as mentioned above. Conclusion of trial is likely to take time as the same is not progressing. Keeping in view the aforementioned facts and circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail, subject to his furnishing personal/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. However, it will be open for the prosecution to apply for cancellation of bail in case the petitioner is found involved in any other subsequent case. 7. It is made clear that any observation made herein above is only for the purpose of deciding the present petition and the same shall have no bearing on the merits of the case. 25.07.2025 (MANISHA BATRA) Waseem Ansari Waseem Ansari Waseem Ansari Waseem Ansari JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.07.28 09:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document