CRM-M-24851-2025 -1- 257 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-24851-2025 Date of Decision:21.07.2025 RAJINDER SINGH ALIAS SONA …PETITIONER VS. STATE OF PUNJAB …RESPONDENT Coram : Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.S.Shekhawat Present : Mr. Vikas Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. I.P.S. Sabharwal, DAG, Punjab. *** N.S.Shekhawat J. (Oral) 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 483 BNSS with a prayer to grant regular bail to him in case FIR No.50 dated 08.03.2025, registered under Section 25 Arms Act, 1959, Police Station Gharinda District Amritsar Rural. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that it has been alleged that the petitioner was indulging in smuggling of weapons from Pakistan through drones. However, during the course of investigation, the police could not collect any evidence to show his connection with any foreign country. The petitioner was arrested in the present case on 08.03.2025 and is in custody for the last about 04 months. Learned counsel further contends that the petitioner is a first offender and was never involved in any other criminal case. VIPIN KUMAR 2025.07.23 13:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this judgment/order CRM-M-24851-2025 -2- 3. On the other hand, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner was smuggling the weapons from Pakistan. However, on a pointed query by the Court, he could not refer to any evidence to substantiate the charge of having foreign connections. He has also filed reply by way of an affidavit of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub Division Attari, Amritsar on behalf of the respondent-State and the same is taken on record. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record carefully. 5. In the present case, the petitioner is stated to be in custody for the last more than 04 months and after completion of investigation, the challan has already been presented against him. Even no witness has been examined so far and the trial Court may take long time to conclude the trial. Thus, the further custody of the petitioner will not serve any useful purpose. 6. Without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate, concerned. 21.07.2025 (N.S. SHEKHAWAT) vipin JUDGE Whether reasoned/speaking : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No VIPIN KUMAR 2025.07.23 13:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this judgment/order