CRM-M-42104-2025 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 246 CRM-M-42104-2025 (O&M) Date of decision : 24.09.2025 Harmeet Singh ...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. Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case arising out of FIR No. 11 dated 09.03.2024, registered under Section 21(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’) and Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 and Sections 10, 11, 12 of the Aircraft Act, 1934 (Sections 29 and 27-A of the NDPS Act added later on) at Police Station Dorangla, District Gurdaspur. 2. The aforementioned FIR was registered on the allegations that on 09.03.2024, on receipt of a secret information to the effect that accused Gurjeet Singh @ Kallu and Satnam Singh were involved in the business of sale of contraband and on that very day itself, they could be apprehended with the same, if a barricade was set up, a raiding party was formed which created a picket at the informed place and the aforementioned persons were apprehended, who came while driving a car. On conducting search, 405 grams of heroin was from beneath the seat of accused Satnam Singh and one pistol and four live MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.09.26 09:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-42104-2025 (O&M) -2- cartridges were recovered from the conscious possession of accused Gurjeet Singh @ Kallu, who was driving the vehicle. They were taken into custody. On interrogation, accused Satnam Singh suffered disclosure statement, whereby the petitioner and co-accused Ranjodh Singh @ Dhillon and Joban were named as co-accused. The petitioner was arrested on 10.03.2024. The petitioner suffered disclosure statement to the effect that on the asking of accused Harjit Singh @ Jeeta, who was lodged in Central Jail, Amritsar, he engaged himself in the task of receiving arms sent from Pakistan and supplying them further and on the date of occurrence, after receiving three pistols and rounds, he had handed over one pistol and two rounds to co-accused Gurjeet Singh and Satnam Singh, whereas two pistols remained with him. On this basis of his disclosure statement, accused Satinder Singh @ Kala and Harjit Singh @ Jeeta were nominated as such and were arrested. Investigation now stands completed. 3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case on the basis of the disclosure statement suffered by above named co-accused, which cannot be considered to be admissible in evidence. He is in custody since 10.03.2024. Co-accused Harpreet Singh @ Happy, Ranjodh Singh @ Jodha, Satinder Singh @ Kala and Harjeet Singh @ Jeeta have since been extended benefit of bail by this Court. On parity, the petitioner too deserves the same benefit. No recovery has been effected from him. Conclusion of trial is likely to take long time as no witness has been examined so far. His further incarceration would not serve any useful purpose. It is, therefore, urged that the petition deserves to be allowed and the petitioner deserves to be released on bail. 4. Status report has been filed by the respondent-State. Learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab has argued that keeping in view the gravity MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.09.26 09:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-42104-2025 (O&M) -3- of the allegations levelled against the petitioner, he is not entitled to get benefit of bail. Hence, it is urged that the petition is liable to be dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at considerable length and have also gone through the record carefully. 6. The petitioner has been nominated in this case on the basis of the disclosure statements suffered by co-accused Gurjeet Singh and Satnam Singh. There is no allegation that he was dealing with contraband nor any recovery of contraband has been effected from him. As per prosecution case, he was dealing in trade of illicit arms and had supplied one pistol and two rounds to the co- accused. The petitioner is in custody since 10.03.2025. Conclusion of trial is likely to take time as no prosecution witness has been examined so far. Some of the co-accused, as mentioned, have already been granted concession of bail. On parity and 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. 24.09.2025 (MANISHA BATRA) Waseem Ansari Waseem Ansari Waseem Ansari Waseem Ansari JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.09.26 09:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document