IN THE 124 (03 cases) 1. CRM-M-25849 Mandeep Singh State of Punjab 2. CRM-M-27628 Shivam Sharma State of Punjab 3. CRM-M-48160 Harmanjeet Walia State of Punjab CORAM : HON'BLE Present :- Mr. Mr. in CRM Mr. Mr. in CRM Mr. for Mr. ***** VINOD S. BHARDWAJ These FIR No.14 dated the Narcotic Drugs the Bharatiya Nyaya Amendment) Act, THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-25849 CRM-M-27628 CRM-M-48160 Date of decision: 25849-2025(O&M) VERSUS 27628-2025(O&M) VERSUS 48160-2025(O&M) Walia VERSUS HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD . Akashdeep Singh, Mr. T.P.S. Bawa Mr. Prateek Pandit, Advocates for the CRM-M-25849-2025. Mr. Hitesh Chopra, Mr. Siddharth Maini Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocates for the petitioner CRM-M-27628-2025. Mr. Raghav Goyal Chandiwala, Advocate the petitioner in CRM-M-48160-2025. Mr. Mohit Kapoor, Sr.DAG, Punjab ***** BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral) These three petitions seeking grant of dated 10.01.2025 registered under Sections Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section Act, 2011 at Police Station STF, PUNJAB & HARYANA CHANDIGARH 25849-2025(O&M) 27628-2025(O&M) 48160-2025(O&M) decision: 10.03.2026 ...Petitioner ...Respondent ...Petitioner ...Respondent ...Petitioner ...Respondent VINOD S. BHARDWAJ Bawa and the petitioner Maini and petitioner Advocate 2025. b. of regular bail in case bearing Sections 21, 27, 27-A & 29 of Substances Act, 1985, Section 238 of 52-A of the Prisons (Punjab STF, District Mohali, Punjab SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.03.10 19:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2 124 (03 cases) CRM-M-25849-2025(O&M) CRM-M-27628-2025(O&M) CRM-M-48160-2025(O&M) having been filed by 03 different accused in the same FIR, are being decided by a common order. 2. As per the case of the prosecution, a secret information was received that one Lakhwinder Singh @ Kalu and Satvir Singh @ Ladi are involved in the trade of intoxicants and that in the event they are apprehended, recovery of contraband can be effected from them. On receipt of the said information, barricading was done and the co-accused Lakhwinder Singh @ Kalu and Satvir Singh @ Ladi were arrested. 400 grams of heroin was recovered from their possession. 3. A disclosure statement of the said accused was recorded to the effect that Gurdhian Singh @ Bhola (brother of Lakhwinder Singh @ Kalu) is lodged in jail and that he has been orchestrating the drug trade through Lakhwinder Singh @ Kalu. The disclosure statement was recorded to the effect that earlier they used to source the drugs from Harmanjeet Walia i.e. petitioner in CRM-M-48160-2025, however, as the quality of the contraband became substandard, they had stopped procuring supplies from him. On the basis of the same, the petitioner-Harmanjeet Walia was nominated as an accused. The allegations against Shivam Sharma i.e. petitioner in CRM-M- 27628-2025 is to the effect that the drug money obtained by Lakhwinder Singh @ Kalu was handed over to him. So far as the allegations against Mandeep Singh i.e. petitioner in CRM-M-25849-2025 is concerned, he was nominated as an accused on the basis of a disclosure of Gurdhian Singh @ Bhola i.e. brother of Lakhwinder Singh @ Kalu wherein he said that Mandeep Singh is his co- prisoner and is also associated with Gurdhian Singh @ Bhola in the said trade. Counsel for the petitioners contend that the petitioners are in custody since 23.01.2025, 12.01.2025 and 11.01.2025 respectively and that no contraband has SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.03.10 19:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 3 124 (03 cases) CRM-M-25849-2025(O&M) CRM-M-27628-2025(O&M) CRM-M-48160-2025(O&M) been recovered from them. Counsel contend that so far as petitioners Shivam Sharma and Harmanjeet Walia are concerned, they have no criminal antecedents, whereas, there are 03 other cases registered against petitioner Mandeep Singh and the said details are mentioned in the petition (CRM-M- 25849-2025). Counsel contend that investigation in the case is complete and a final report has been filed. They further contend that even though charge was initially framed on 08.05.2025, however, a supplementary chargesheet was filed after arrest of Warden Tarlok Singh (petitioner in CRM-M-54186-2025- withdrawn today), therefore, charges are to be framed yet again. They further contend that there are 45 witnesses to be examined and that conclusion of trial shall take long. 4. Learned State Counsel does not dispute the facts noticed as above, with respect to the nomination of the petitioners as accused, the role attributed against them as well as the criminal antecedents and lack of recovery from them. He however contends that there are 42 witnesses. The stage of the trial is also not disputed. 5. A specific query has been put to the State Counsel as to what was the reciprocal obligation required to be discharged by Shivam Sharma in lieu of the money being handed over to him, he is not in a position to offer any explanation for the same. A further query is made to the effect that as to how the disclosure of the accused wherein they themselves stated that they stopped making purchases from Harmanjeet Walia would be sufficient to nominate him as a supplier. He is not in a position to offer any explanation to the same, rather, he submits that the concluded investigation records that the contraband was purchased from certain unknown persons. SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.03.10 19:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 4 124 (03 cases) CRM-M-25849-2025(O&M) CRM-M-27628-2025(O&M) CRM-M-48160-2025(O&M) 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respective parties and have gone through the documents appended along with the present petition. 7. Taking into consideration the period of custody already undergone by the petitioners, the stage of the trial, the likelihood of trial being delayed on account of large number of witnesses to be examined as well as absence of any recovery from the petitioners herein, I deem it appropriate to allow the present petitions. 8. The instant petitions are allowed and the petitioners are ordered to be released on regular bail on their furnishing requisite bail bond/surety bond to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned. 9. It is made clear that the petitioners shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witnesses in any manner directly or indirectly. 10. The observation made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case and the Trial Court shall decide the case on the basis of available material. 11. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. 10.03.2026 (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) Sumit Gusain JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.03.10 19:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document