CRM-M-19043-2026 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 214 CRM-M-19043-2026 Decided on : 23.07.2026 SUKHJIT SINGH ......Petitioner Versus STATE OF PUNJAB ......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH Present: Ms. Navjot Kaur, Advocate, for Mr. B.S. Bhalla, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Vinay Malhotra, DAG, Punjab, assisted by ASI Sahib Singh. **** SANJAY VASHISTH, J. 1. The instant petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C.), for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, during the pendency of trial, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder:- Name of Petitioner(s) FIR No. Date Section(s) Police Station District Sukhjit Singh, aged about 38 years 123 04.05.2025 21-C, 29 of NDPS Act and section 25 of Arms Act Gharinda Amritsar 2. As per the case of prosecution, while police party was on patrolling, and conducting search for anti-social elements, two persons LAVISHA 2026.07.23 14:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh CRM-M-19043-2026 2 were noticed walking together on foot. On seeing the police party, both of them allegedly became perplexed. Upon being apprehended, they disclosed their identities. During search, 553 grams of heroin was allegedly recovered from the possession of co-accused Malkiat Singh, whereas from the possession of the present petitioner, one Glock 9 mm pistol along with a magazine was recovered. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, prior to the present occurrence, another case under the Arms Act had already been registered against the petitioner at the same police station on 03.05.2025, i.e. one day before the registration of the present case. It is contended that by relying upon the alleged recovery of the weapon in the present case, petitioner has been falsely implicated. Moreover, petitioner is inside jail since 08.05.2025, i.e. for a period of approximately one year, two months and fourteen days. It is further submitted that petitioner has never been involved in any case under the NDPS Act in the past and, even in the present case, no narcotic contraband has been recovered from his conscious possession. 4. Learned counsel further submits that, as recovery of heroin from co-accused Malkiat Singh is concerned, question whether the petitioner had any knowledge of, or was in conscious possession of the said contraband, which was allegedly recovered from the exclusive possession of the co-accused, is a matter requiring adjudication during the course of trial. It is also pointed out that, out of total 14 prosecution LAVISHA 2026.07.23 14:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh CRM-M-19043-2026 3 witnesses, none has been examined, so far. Thus, learned counsel prays for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in the present case. 5. In response to the arguments addressed by learned counsel for the petitioner, learned State counsel, produces the custody certificate dated 22.07.2026 in Court today, which is taken on record. Office to tag the same at appropriate place. A copy thereof has been handed over to the counsel for the petitioner. As per the custody certificate, in the present case, petitioner has already undergone 01 year 02 months and 14 days period inside jail. 6. Learned State counsel is unable to dispute any of the factual assertion as stated by counsel for the petitioner today before this Court, including the total incarceration undergone by the petitioner and stage of trial. However, he prays for dismissal of the present petition. 7. This Court has heard the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and has perused the material available on record. 8. Undisputedly, petitioner who is aged 38 years, no narcotic contraband has been recovered from his possession, in the past and in the present case. As submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner, even in the case registered under the Arms Act a day prior to the present FIR, no recovery was effected from him. Furthermore, the alleged recovery of 553 grams of heroin was effected from the possession of co-accused Malkiat Singh. Whether the petitioner had any knowledge of, or was in conscious possession of the said contraband, is a matter that can only be determined during the course of trial. Depending upon the findings ultimately recorded, question as to whether the petitioner would be liable LAVISHA 2026.07.23 14:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh CRM-M-19043-2026 4 only for the alleged offence under the Arms Act, or also for the offences under the NDPS Act, would likewise fall for adjudication by learned Trial Court. It is also apparent that conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time. 9. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, and having regard to the totality of facts and circumstances, nature of the allegations, absence of any recovery of narcotic contraband from the petitioner, and delay in conclusion of the trial, this Court deems it appropriate to extend the concession of regular bail to the petitioner in the present case. Consequently, prayer made in the present petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, subject to his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/ Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Illaqa Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case. 10. Needless to observe that the petitioner shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witness in any manner directly or indirectly. 11. Any of the discussion done and recorded here above, shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the facts of the case. Therefore, trial Court is expected to decide the case by taking an independent view, on the basis of evidence available on record, as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law. LAVISHA 2026.07.23 14:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh CRM-M-19043-2026 5 12. It is further made clear that if, in future, petitioner is directly found indulged in similar kind of activities, this order shall be deemed to be cancelled. 13. Petition stands disposed of. (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE 23.07.2026 Lavisha Whether Speaking/Reasoned: YES/NO Whether Reportable: YES/NO LAVISHA 2026.07.23 14:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh