Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2026 DAILYLAW 32717 (PNJ)

SUKHJEET SINGH @ SUKHA ATWAL v. STATE OF PUNJAB

CRM-M/26518/2026 · 2026-07-22

Shalini Singh Nagpal

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 CRM-M-26518-2026 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AN D HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 102+206 CRM-M-26518-2026 (O&M) Date of decision: 22.07.2026 SUKHJEET SINGH @ SUKH ATWAL PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB RESPONDENT CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL Present: Mr. Satwant Mehta, Advocate (through VC) and Mr. Akashdeep Bawa, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sukhbeer Singh, DAG Punjab. *** Shalini Singh Nagpal, J. (ORAL) CRM-26889-2026 1. Application under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (B.N.S.S.), 2023 has been moved for placing on record copy of judgment dated 19.12.2023 in FIR No.53. dated 21.08.2019 under Section 21 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Police Station Sarain Amant Khan, District Tarn Taran (Annexure P-4). 2. Allowed. 3. Annexure P-4 is taken on record, subject to just exceptions. CRM-M-26518-2026 1. Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in FIR No.46 dated 04.04.2025 under Sections 21-B, 27-A of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and Section 111 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (B.N.S.), 2023, Police Station Cantonement, District Police Commissionerate Amritsar. Sections 21- C, 25 and 29 of the NDPS Act, 1985 have been added in the FIR during investigation. HARPREET SINGH CHAUHAN 2026.07.23 09:44 I agree to specified portions of this document 2 CRM-M-26518-2026 (O&M) 2. It is alleged that on 04.04.2025, one Sahil Gill was found in conscious possession of 47 grams of Heroin in a waxed envelope. Drug money of ₹1,720/- was also recovered. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was innocent and had been falsely implicated. He was not named in the FIR nor it was case of the prosecution that he had run away from the spot. Name of the petitioner figured in the disclosure statement of co-accused Harpal Singh, who was arrested by the police with 278 grams of Heroin. On disclosure statement of Harpal Singh, petitioner and Lovepreet Singh alias Labha were nominated in the case. Disclosure statement of co-accused was not admissible in evidence, being a confession made to the police officer. Lovepreet Singh alias Labha, who was similarly situated, was granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 09.04.2026 in CRM-M-73017-2025 and case against petitioner was at par. Learned counsel further submits that petitioner was ready and willing to join investigation. 4. Status report by way of affidavit of Mr. Kamaljit Singh, PPS, Assistant Commissioner of Police, West, Amritsar on behalf of the respondent-State has been filed. The same is made part of the record. Learned State counsel opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail submitting that Sahil Gill alias Shallu disclosed name of Harpal Singh alias Bhala s/o Randhir Singh as the person from whom he purchased the Heroin. Said Harpal Singh alias Bhala was arrested on 28.04.2025 by the Investigating Officer and 278 grams of Heroin was recovered from the dashboard of his car. During investigation, Harpal Singh alias Bhala disclosed that they used to purchase the Heroin from one Sukh Atwal (nick name of petitioner-Sukhjeet Singh), resident of Village Kasel, Tarn Taran and Lovepreet Singh alias Labba, resident of Indira Colony, Meeran Kot, Amritsar. Final investigation report in HARPREET SINGH CHAUHAN 2026.07.23 09:44 I agree to specified portions of this document 3 CRM-M-26518-2026 (O&M) the case against accused Sahil Gill alias Shallu and Harpal Singh alias Bhala was submitted in the Court. Though, Lovepreet Singh alias Labba had been allowed anticipatory bail, his case was not on the same footing as petitioner was a previous convict. 5. The benefit of anticipatory bail cannot be granted as a matter of course or routine. While considering the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail, the Court is required to balance the right of the prosecution for free, fair and unhindered investigation as also personal liberty of the accused and interest of the society. Role attributed to the accused is required to be considered with great care and caution. Anticipatory bail being an extra-ordinary remedy is to be granted only in exceptional circumstances, where the Court is prima facie of the view that the accused has been falsely involved in the crime. 6. Lovepreet Singh alias Labba has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 09.04.2026. On the strength of the order, petitioner claims the benefit of anticipatory bail on parity. Learned counsel for the petitioner has himself placed on record copy of judgment dated 19.12.2023 of learned Judge Special Court (under NDPS Act), Tarn Taran in case bearing No.NDPS/30/2020 titled ‘State Vs. Sukhpreet Singh’ arising out of FIR No.53 dated 21.08.2019 under Section 21 of the NDPS Act, 1985, Police Station, Sarai Amant Khan, vide which petitioner was convicted and sentenced to the period already undergone by him. Considering his antecedents, he cannot claim anticipatory bail as a matter of right, on parity. The quantity of contraband recovered from possession of co-accused Harpal Singh alias Bhala is commercial. Petitioner is stated to be one of the principal suppliers in the chain of illicit trafficking of narcotic drugs. Considering antecedents of the petitioner, plea of the prosecution that he was involved in HARPREET SINGH CHAUHAN 2026.07.23 09:44 I agree to specified portions of this document 4 CRM-M-26518-2026 (O&M) organized network of narcotic trafficking, cannot be brushed aside summarily. Sections 27-A and 29 of the NDPS Act, 1985 read with Section 111 BNS have also been invoked against him. In view of the statutory bar envisaged by Section 37 of the NDPS Act, 1985, petitioner is not entitled to the concession of anticipatory bail. In such cases, negation of bail is the rule and granting it is an exception. No case for dispensing with mandatory requirement of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, 1985 is made out in the present case. The prayer for anticipatory bail is, therefore, declined. 7. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL) JUDGE 22.07.2026 HS.CHAUHAN Whether Speaking/Reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No HARPREET SINGH CHAUHAN 2026.07.23 09:44 I agree to specified portions of this document