243 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-36491-2026 Date of Decision:14.07.2026 Hira Singh …Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab …Respondent Coram : Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.S.Shekhawat Present : Mr. Puneet Kumar Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sartaj Singh Gill, Sr. DAG, Punjab. *** N.S.Shekhawat J. (Oral) 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with a prayer to grant regular bail to him in case FIR No.44, dated 26.03.2026, registered under Section 21 of NDPS Act (Section 29 of NDPS Act added later on), at Police Station Badhni Kalan, District Moga (Annexure P-1). 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the F.I.R was initially registered against Balwinder Singh @ Bindu son of Ajaib Singh, Jobanpreet Singh @ Joban and Balwinder Singh son of Sarwan Singh. The petitioner was neither named in the F.I.R nor any recovery was effected from him. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contends that the petitioner was nominated as an accused in the present case only on the basis of disclousure statement suffered by his co-accused and he was wrongly arrested on HITESH 2026.07.15 09:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh CRM-M-36491-2026 -2 26.03.2026. He further submits that the petitioner was not involved in any other case, in the past. 3. On the other hand, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that serious allegations have been levelled against the present petitioner and the present petition deserves to be dismissed by this Court. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record carefully. 5. It is not in dispute that no recovery was effected from the present petitioner and his case is clearly distinguishable from the case of three other co- accused, who were arrested at the spot. Even, no recovery was effected from the petitioner in the present case and he is in custody for the last about four months. Thus, further custody of the petitioner will not serve any meaningful purpose. 6. Without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bonds and surety to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court/ Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate. (N.S.SHEKHAWAT) 14.07.2026 JUDGE hitesh Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No HITESH 2026.07.15 09:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh