IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 282 CRM-M-53002-2024 (O&M) Date of decision: 04.09.2025 Gurpreet Singh @ Moor ...Petitioner(s) VERSUS State of Punjab ...Respondent(s) CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ Present :- Mr. P.S. Sekhon, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Mr. I.P.S. Sabharwal, DAG Punjab. ***** VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral) 1. The instant petition has been filed under Section 483 of The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for the grant of regular bail in FIR bearing No.30 dated 25.06.2024, registered under Section(s) 22/61/85 of the NDPS Act, 1985 at Police Station Bakhshiwala, District Patiala. 2. Short affidavit dated 03.09.2025 of Mr. Manoj Gorsi, PPS, Superintendent of Police, City-2, District Patiala, on behalf of respondent- State as well as custody certificate, have been filed today in the Court by the learned State counsel and the same are taken on record. 3. Briefly summarised, the facts of the present case are that on 25.06.2024, a police party headed by SI Jaswinder Singh was present at T- Point Indrapuri backside Laxmi Marriage, Palace, Patiala in connection with MANGAL SINGH 2025.09.04 19:25 I am the author of this document 2 282 CRM-M-53002-2024 (O&M) patrolling and search of bad elements. At about 1.40 p.m., the petitioner was apprehended by the police party and recovery of 700 intoxicant tablets from the polythene thrown from his lower’s right pocket near the wall of Laxmi Palace, was effected from him. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been in custody since 27.06.2024 and he has undergone the actual imprisonment for a period of 01 year, 02 months and 7 days and is not required for the purpose of further investigation. He further submits that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents and hence, there is no likelihood of the petitioner involving himself in commission of any other offence. It is further submitted that out of total 12 prosecution witnesses cited by the respondent, only 02 have been examined so far and the trial is likely to take a long time in its conclusion. 5. Learned counsel for respondent-State does not dispute that as per the custody certificate, the petitioner has undergone the actual imprisonment for a period of 01 year, 02 months and 7 days and that the trial is still at an initial stage as only 02 prosecution witnesses out of total 12, have been examined. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner is not involved in any other criminal case. 6. Taking into consideration the clear antecedents of the petitioner, the period of imprisonment actually undergone by the petitioner as well as the stage of the trial and bearing in mind that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take a long time, I deem it fit to allow the instant petition. MANGAL SINGH 2025.09.04 19:25 I am the author of this document 3 282 CRM-M-53002-2024 (O&M) 7. Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be admitted to regular bail subject to his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Illaqa Magistrate concerned. 8. It is made clear that the petitioner shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witness in any manner directly or indirectly. 9. 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. (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) 04.09.2025 JUDGE Mangal Singh Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No MANGAL SINGH 2025.09.04 19:25 I am the author of this document