CRM-M-35277-2026 1 220 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-35277-2026 Date of Decision: 08.07.2026 SANDEEP SINGH @ SONU SAHI ...Petitioner Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB ...Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL Present: Ms. Neha Jain, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Navreet Kaur, AAG, Punjab. VIRINDER AGGARWAL , J. (Oral) 1. The present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973), seeking the concession of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No. 209 dated 09.10.2024, registered under Section 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (with Section 29 of the NDPS Act having been added subsequently), at Police Station Dasuya, District Hoshiarpur (Annexure P-1). 2. As per the prosecution, the FIR was registered on the statement of a police official, who along with the police party was conducting checking of suspicious persons near GT Road, Usman Shaheed Bridge, near Bus Stand. Police party noticed a person sitting under the shed of the bus stand, who on seeing the police attempted to flee and allegedly threw a plastic bag on the road. The said person was apprehended and, on inquiry, disclosed his identity as Manish Kumar. Upon checking the said plastic bag, 110 grams of intoxicant powder was allegedly recovered. As per the FSL report, the recovered substance was found to be Alprazolam, falling under commercial quantity. KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.09 10:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-35277-2026 2 During the course of investigation, the petitioner was nominated as an accused with the aid of Section 29 of the NDPS Act on the basis of the alleged disclosure statement of co-accused Manish Kumar. The petitioner was arrested on 11.11.2024. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and his name does not find mention in the FIR. It is submitted that the petitioner has been nominated subsequently only on the basis of the alleged disclosure statement of the co-accused, which is not admissible in evidence. Learned counsel further submits that the alleged recovery of 110 grams of Alprazolam was effected from the co-accused Manish Kumar and no recovery whatsoever has been effected from the conscious possession of the petitioner. It is contended that there is no independent material available on record connecting the petitioner with the alleged offence except the statement of the co-accused. 3.1 Learned counsel submits that merely on account of the alleged criminal antecedents, the petitioner cannot be kept in continued incarceration, particularly when there is no recovery from him and his implication is based solely on the disclosure statement of a co-accused. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 11.11.2024, the investigation stands completed, challan has been presented and charges have already been framed. The trial is pending and is likely to take considerable time to conclude, as the prosecution evidence is yet to be completed. Learned counsel further submits that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind bars during the pendency of the trial and prays that the petitioner be enlarged on regular bail. KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.09 10:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-35277-2026 3 4. Notice of motion. 5. Ms. Navreet Kaur, AAG, Punjab, has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent-State and has filed the custody certificate dated 07.07.2026, which is taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. As per the custody certificate, the petitioner has already undergone a total custody period of 01 year 07 months and 27 days. 6. Learned State counsel has opposed the present petition and submitted that the petitioner does not deserve the concession of regular bail, as the allegations against him are serious in nature as he has been nominated in the present case during the course of investigation on the basis of the disclosure statement of the co-accused and his involvement has surfaced in connection with the offence under the NDPS Act. Learned State counsel further submits that the alleged recovery of 110 grams of Alprazolam from the co-accused falls within the category of commercial quantity, and therefore, the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are attracted. It is further submitted that the petitioner is having criminal antecedents and other cases under the NDPS Act are also registered against him, which reflects his propensity to indulge in similar offences. 7. Be that as it may, considering the custody period already undergone by the petitioner and the fact that the investigation stands completed, the challan has already been presented before the learned Trial Court and charges have been framed, the petitioner is no longer required for the purpose of investigation. It is further evident that the trial is likely to take considerable time to reach its logical conclusion, as the prosecution evidence is yet to be completed. Therefore, no useful purpose would be served by KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.09 10:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-35277-2026 4 keeping the petitioner behind bars for an indefinite period during the pendency of the trial. Furthermore, no recovery was effected fromthe petitioner and he has been implicated merely on the basis of disclosure statement of co-accused. 8. Reliance is placed upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Dataram Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another, 2018 (2) R.C.R. (Criminal) 131, wherein it has been held that grant of bail is the rule and refusal thereof is an exception, and that a person is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty. It is further submitted that the right to speedy trial forms an integral part of the right to life and personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, and the same has been consistently recognised by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, including in Balwinder Singh v. State of Punjab & Another (SLO (Crl.) No. 8523/2024). In these circumstances, continued incarceration of the petitioner would serve no useful purpose, particularly when the trial can be effectively safeguarded by imposing appropriate conditions. 9. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed, and the petitioner is ordered to be admitted on regular bail, subject to furnishing requisite bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned/Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, as the case may be, and further subject to the following conditions:- 1. The petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts before the Court or to the investigating agency. 2. The petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever, nor shall attempt, KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.09 10:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-35277-2026 5 directly or indirectly, to influence, intimidate, or contact any prosecution witness. 3. The petitioner shall not leave the territorial limits of India without obtaining the prior permission of the learned Trial Court. In the event he is in possession of a passport, he shall furnish its particulars before the Investigating Officer as well as the learned Trial Court. 4. The learned Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, before accepting the bail and surety bonds, shall obtain from the petitioner his permanent residential address as well as present correspondence address, duly supported by appropriate documentary proof. The Investigating Officer shall verify the correctness of the said addresses within 48 hours from the acceptance of the bail bonds and shall place a verification report on the record. In the event either of the addresses is found to be false, fictitious, or incorrect, it shall be open to the prosecution to seek cancellation of the concession of bail in accordance with law. 5. The petitioner shall furnish before the learned Trial Court, either at the time of furnishing the bail bonds or within such period as may be specified by the Court, Permanent Account Number (PAN), Aadhaar Number, particulars of all operative bank accounts, and a declaration disclosing details of immovable properties, if any. Any concealment of material particulars or furnishing of false information shall constitute a valid ground for seeking cancellation of bail in accordance with law. 6. The petitioner shall intimate the Investigating Officer as well as the learned Trial Court, in writing, of any change in residential address or mobile number within seven days from the date of such change. 7. The petitioner shall not commit any offence of a similar nature during the pendency of the trial and shall remain present before the learned Trial Court on each and every date fixed, unless his personal appearance is exempted in accordance with law. He shall not absent himself from the proceedings without obtaining prior permission of the learned Trial Court. In the event of any violation of the aforesaid conditions or his unauthorized absence from the trial KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.09 10:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-35277-2026 6 proceedings, it shall be open to the learned Trial Court to proceed in accordance with law, including cancellation of the concession of regular bail and issuance of appropriate coercive process, including warrants of arrest. (VIRINDER AGGARWAL) JUDGE 08.07.2026 kv Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.09 10:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh