CRM-M- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 231 MANJIT SINGH @ BABA STATE OF CORAM: PRESENT: SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral) 1. 2023 (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C.), for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, during the pendency of trial, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder: Name of Petitioner(s) Manjit Singh @ Baba -35335-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH MANJIT SINGH @ BABA VS. STATE OF PUNJAB CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH PRESENT: Mr. Jashandeep Singh Sandhu for the petitioner. Mr. Bareen Pratap Singh, AAG, Punjab. **** SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral) The instant petition has been filed under 2023 (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C.), for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, during the pendency of trial, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder: Petitioner(s) FIR No. Date Section(s) Manjit Singh 29 16.02.2024 21 (c ) of N.D.P.S. Act 1985 and Section 29 of NDPS Act added later on - 1 – IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-35335-2025 Decided on : 15.09.2025 . . . PETITIONER . . . RESPONDENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH Jashandeep Singh Sandhu, Advocate Bareen Pratap Singh, AAG, Punjab. The instant petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C.), for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, during the pendency of trial, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder:- Police Station District 21 (c ) of N.D.P.S. Act 1985 and Section 29 of NDPS Act STF, SAS Nagar Mohali Tarn Taran Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C.), for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, during the pendency of trial, who has been booked in a criminal case arising District Taran POONAM SHARMA 2025.09.17 15:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRM-M- 2. accused Dalbir Singh of the present petitioner accused with the allegation of supplying of the 3. is implanted against him points out that apart the present case the petitioner was earlier involved in two more NDPS cases i.e. FIR No.140, dated 27.07.2020, under Sectio NDPS Act, Police Station Bhikhiwind, District Tarn Taran and FIR No.97, dated 16.08.2021, under Section 21 Station Bhikhiwind, Distt. Tarn Taran. In both the cases, the allegations against the petitioner was of sim drug/contraband and in the said two cases petitioner is already on bail. 4. arresting the petitioner in the present case, no contraband has been from him, either on this occasion or on earlier occasions. The sole substance of involvement of the petitioner is the main accused Dalbir Singh who running a shop in the secret information been falsely implicated incarceration -35335-2025 There was recovery of 400 grams of heroin from accused Dalbir Singh which undoubtedly of the present petitioner is involved through the disclosure statement of with the allegation of supplying of the Learned counsel for the petitio implanted against him as he was already points out that apart the present case the petitioner was earlier involved in two more NDPS cases i.e. FIR No.140, dated 27.07.2020, under Sectio NDPS Act, Police Station Bhikhiwind, District Tarn Taran and FIR No.97, dated 16.08.2021, under Section 21-C of NDPS Act, registered at Police Station Bhikhiwind, Distt. Tarn Taran. In both the cases, the allegations against the petitioner was of similar nature i.e. of supplying of the drug/contraband and in the said two cases petitioner is already on bail. Extending his submissions, counsel arresting the petitioner in the present case, no contraband has been from him, either on this occasion or on earlier occasions. The sole substance of involvement of the petitioner is due to the reason of his connection with main accused Dalbir Singh who is in running a shop as well, in the village. Mr. Sandhu also points out that even in the secret information, name of the petitioner didn’t appear and ha been falsely implicated later on. Moreover, incarceration since 16.02.2024 and as of now there is no progress in the - 2 – 400 grams of heroin from the main which undoubtedly is of commercial quantity. Name through the disclosure statement of main with the allegation of supplying of the said heroin. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the present case already known to local police and also points out that apart the present case the petitioner was earlier involved in two more NDPS cases i.e. FIR No.140, dated 27.07.2020, under Section 21 NDPS Act, Police Station Bhikhiwind, District Tarn Taran and FIR No.97, C of NDPS Act, registered at Police Station Bhikhiwind, Distt. Tarn Taran. In both the cases, the allegations ilar nature i.e. of supplying of the drug/contraband and in the said two cases petitioner is already on bail. Extending his submissions, counsel further submits that after arresting the petitioner in the present case, no contraband has been recovered from him, either on this occasion or on earlier occasions. The sole substance due to the reason of his connection with in fact, none but the co-villager and in the village. Mr. Sandhu also points out that even name of the petitioner didn’t appear and has thus . Moreover, petitioner is suffering since 16.02.2024 and as of now there is no progress in the the main ame main present case also points out that apart the present case the petitioner was earlier involved in n 21 NDPS Act, Police Station Bhikhiwind, District Tarn Taran and FIR No.97, C of NDPS Act, registered at Police Station Bhikhiwind, Distt. Tarn Taran. In both the cases, the allegations ilar nature i.e. of supplying of the after ecovered from him, either on this occasion or on earlier occasions. The sole substance due to the reason of his connection with and in the village. Mr. Sandhu also points out that even s thus is suffering since 16.02.2024 and as of now there is no progress in the POONAM SHARMA 2025.09.17 15:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRM-M- trial of the case examined. 5. by the petitioner. Moreover, Court has alread involvement of the petitioner in other criminal cases by the petitioner’s counsel himself. convicted till date nor there is any allegation (as submitted by petitioner’s counsel) that in the present case or the earlier registered cases against petitioner under NDPS Act at any point of time any quantity contraband was recovered from him No.140/2020, dated 27.07.2020, under Section 21 at Police Station Bhikhiwind 6. bail, learned State counsel submits that keeping in view the nature of offence, he does not deserve concession of bail. However, learned counsel though does not dispute the factual position, as explained by the petitioner’s counsel here 7. relevant material available on record. 8. the fact of recovery of narcotic contraband from the -35335-2025 trial of the case, because out of total 15 witnesses examined. Learned State is unable to controvert any of the plea addressed by the petitioner. Moreover, Court has alread involvement of the petitioner in other criminal cases by the petitioner’s counsel himself. In none of the cases, petitioner has been convicted till date nor there is any allegation (as submitted by petitioner’s counsel) that in the present case or the earlier registered cases against petitioner under NDPS Act at any point of time any quantity contraband was recovered from him No.140/2020, dated 27.07.2020, under Section 21 at Police Station Bhikhiwind. On the other hand, while vehemently opposing the prayer of bail, learned State counsel submits that keeping in view the nature of offence, he does not deserve concession of bail. However, learned counsel though does not dispute the factual position, as explained by the petitioner’s counsel here-above. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant material available on record. While considering the plea of bail, this Court is conscious of the fact of recovery of narcotic contraband from the - 3 – because out of total 15 witnesses only one has been Learned State is unable to controvert any of the plea addressed by the petitioner. Moreover, Court has already taken notice of the involvement of the petitioner in other criminal cases, as have been disclosed none of the cases, petitioner has been convicted till date nor there is any allegation (as submitted by petitioner’s counsel) that in the present case or the earlier registered cases against petitioner under NDPS Act at any point of time any quantity of Narcotic contraband was recovered from him except of one case i.e. FIR No.140/2020, dated 27.07.2020, under Section 21 of NDPS Act, registered On the other hand, while vehemently opposing the prayer of bail, learned State counsel submits that keeping in view the nature of offence, he does not deserve concession of bail. However, learned State counsel though does not dispute the factual position, as explained by the I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the While considering the plea of bail, this Court is conscious of the fact of recovery of narcotic contraband from the co-accused. However, one has been Learned State is unable to controvert any of the plea addressed y taken notice of the as have been disclosed none of the cases, petitioner has been convicted till date nor there is any allegation (as submitted by petitioner’s counsel) that in the present case or the earlier registered cases against Narcotic FIR of NDPS Act, registered On the other hand, while vehemently opposing the prayer of bail, learned State counsel submits that keeping in view the nature of State counsel though does not dispute the factual position, as explained by the I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the While considering the plea of bail, this Court is conscious of . However, POONAM SHARMA 2025.09.17 15:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRM-M- this Court also cannot overlook other factual aspects, such as; the young age of the petitioner, his involveme basis of disclosure statement, undergone, as well as the potential risk of his coming into contact with hardened criminals in the eventuality of prolonged detention. Therefore, th Court deems it appropriate to consider the plea of bail of the petitioner. 9. no material or contraband was recovered from his possession. Furthermore, the connectivity of the petitioner in the present case) is for the purpose of drug business or some other reason is yet to be ascertained during the course of examination of witnesses. The petitioner has already been inside the jail since 28.10 grant of regular bail seems to be worth consideration. 10. Petitioner bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction o Magistrate/ Illaqa Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case. 11. threat and shall not influence any prosecution witness or indirectly. -35335-2025 this Court also cannot overlook other factual aspects, such as; the young age of the petitioner, his involvement in a case under the NDPS Act only on basis of disclosure statement, the total period of incarceration already undergone, as well as the potential risk of his coming into contact with hardened criminals in the eventuality of prolonged detention. Therefore, th Court deems it appropriate to consider the plea of bail of the petitioner. Despite the petitioner, having been arrested in the present case, no material or contraband was recovered from his possession. Furthermore, the connectivity of the petitioner to the co in the present case) is for the purpose of drug business or some other reason is yet to be ascertained during the course of examination of witnesses. The petitioner has already been inside the jail since 28.10 grant of regular bail seems to be worth consideration. Consequently, prayer made in the present petition is Petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, subject to his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/ Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Illaqa Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case. Needless to observe that the petitioner shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witness or indirectly. - 4 – this Court also cannot overlook other factual aspects, such as; the young age ase under the NDPS Act only on the total period of incarceration already undergone, as well as the potential risk of his coming into contact with hardened criminals in the eventuality of prolonged detention. Therefore, th Court deems it appropriate to consider the plea of bail of the petitioner. Despite the petitioner, having been arrested in the present case, no material or contraband was recovered from his possession. Furthermore, to the co-villager Dalbir Singh (co-accused in the present case) is for the purpose of drug business or some other reason is yet to be ascertained during the course of examination of witnesses. The petitioner has already been inside the jail since 28.10.2024, thus plea for grant of regular bail seems to be worth consideration. Consequently, prayer made in the present petition is allowed is ordered to be released on bail, subject to his furnishing f the learned trial Court/ Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Illaqa Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in Needless to observe that the petitioner shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witness in any manner directly this Court also cannot overlook other factual aspects, such as; the young age ase under the NDPS Act only on the the total period of incarceration already undergone, as well as the potential risk of his coming into contact with hardened criminals in the eventuality of prolonged detention. Therefore, this Despite the petitioner, having been arrested in the present case, no material or contraband was recovered from his possession. Furthermore, accused in the present case) is for the purpose of drug business or some other reason is yet to be ascertained during the course of examination of witnesses. The .2024, thus plea for allowed. is ordered to be released on bail, subject to his furnishing f the learned trial Court/ Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Illaqa Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in Needless to observe that the petitioner shall not extend any in any manner directly POONAM SHARMA 2025.09.17 15:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRM-M- 12. an expression of opinion on the facts of the case and the Trial Court is expected to decide the case on the basis of complete evidence available on record. 13. found indulged in similar kind of activities, this order shall be deemed to be cancelled. 14. September Poonam Sharma Whether speaking/reasoned: -35335-2025 The observation made here- an expression of opinion on the facts of the case and the Trial Court is expected to decide the case on the basis of complete evidence available on It is further made clear that if, in future, petitioner is directly found indulged in similar kind of activities, this order shall be deemed to be cancelled. Petition stands disposed of. September 15, 2025 Poonam Sharma Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No - 5 – -in-above shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the facts of the case and the Trial Court is expected to decide the case on the basis of complete evidence available on It is further made clear that if, in future, petitioner is directly found indulged in similar kind of activities, this order shall be deemed to be (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No above shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the facts of the case and the Trial Court is expected to decide the case on the basis of complete evidence available on It is further made clear that if, in future, petitioner is directly found indulged in similar kind of activities, this order shall be deemed to be (SANJAY VASHISTH) POONAM SHARMA 2025.09.17 15:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document