IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH SR. NO.105 CRM-M-39134-2026 DECIDED ON:20.07.2026 SANDEEP SINGH @ VICKY …PETITIONER(S) VERSUS VS STATE OF PUNJAB ...RESPONDENT(S) CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N.S.SHEKHAWAT Present: Mr. Ramnish Puri, Advocate for the petitioner. N.S. SHEKHAWAT, J. 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 with a prayer to grant the concession of pre-arrest bail in FIR No.13 dated 14.01.2026 registered under Sections 21 (c) and 29 of the NDPS Act and Section 25 of the Arms Act at Police Station Khalra, District Tarn Taran. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that on 14.01.2026, the police had arrested Sandeep Singh @ Manga and Akashdeep Singh @ Akash, both co-accused, at the spot and allegedly recovered 264 grams of heroin and 1 Glock pistol. He further submits that the petitioner was neither present at the sport nor any connection with the recovery made from his co- accused. Learned counsel next contends that the petitioner has been arrayed as an accused in the present case only on the basis of disclosure statements MUKESH KUMAR SALUJA 2026.07.20 19:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRM-M-39134-2026 -2- suffered by his co-accused, which carry no evidentiary value and the petitioner deserves the concession of pre-arrest bail. 3. Notice of motion. 4. On the asking of Court, Mr. M.S. Bajwa, DAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. 5. Learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner is involved in two more cases under the NDPS Act, i.e. FIR No.25 dated 14.02.2026 registered at Police Station Valtoha, District Tarn Taran and FIR No.45 dated 08.03.2024 registered at Police Station Chheharta, District Amritsar. He next submits that as per the disclosure statements suffered by the co-accused, namely, Sandeep Singh @ Manga and Akashdeep Singh @ Akash, the petitioner also used to bring heroin from Pakistan and they have good connections across the border and thus, his custodial interrogation is required in the present case. Learned State counsel has also relied upon the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of State of Haryana Vs Samarth Kumar, 2022(3) RCR (Crl.) 991, wherein it has been observed as follows:- “8. In cases of this nature, the respondents may be able to take advantage of the decision in Tofan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu (supra), perhaps at the time of arguing the regular bail application or at the time of final hearing after conclusion of the trial. 9. To grant anticipatory bail in a case of this nature is not really warranted. Therefore, we are of the view that the High MUKESH KUMAR SALUJA 2026.07.20 19:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRM-M-39134-2026 -3- Court fell into an error in granting anticipatory bail to the respondents.” 6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file carefully. 7. In the present case, there are serious allegations against the petitioner and as per the case of the prosecution, Sandeep Singh @ Manga and Akashdeep Singh @ Akash were arrested from the sport and recovered 264 grams of heroin and 1 Glock pistol from them. During the course of investigation, it was found that both the above-said co-accused as well as the petitioner had connections with the pakistani nationals and used to illegally import heroin and other contrabands from the Pakistan. Even the accused in the present case are drug smugglers, who are active in the area and the past also, the petitioner is involved in two more cases of similar nature. 8. It is a matter of common knowledge that nowadays, drug smugglers in the Punjab are getting the contrabands from Pakistan through drones and other sophisticated means and such cases are to be dealt with an iron hand. Apart from that, if the petitioner is granted the concession of anticipatory bail, the investigation of the present case would be hampered. Thus, in the considered opinion of this Court, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner would be required to unmask the modus operandi, names of the other persons involved in the crime and the source of supply as well. Apart from that, the petitioner is also involved in more than two cases as noted above and thus, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of anticipatory bail. MUKESH KUMAR SALUJA 2026.07.20 19:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRM-M-39134-2026 -4- 9. In view of the above discussion, this Court finds no merit in the present petition and accordingly, the same is hereby dismissed. 20.07.2026 (N.S.SHEKHAWAT) mks JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned: YES / NO Whether Reportable: YES / NO MUKESH KUMAR SALUJA 2026.07.20 19:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh