CRM-M-26055-2026 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 247 CRM-M-26055-2026 (O&M) Date of decision:23.07.2026 Satgur Singh ... Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present: Mr. P.S. Dhaliwal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Roshandeep Singh, AAG, Punjab. ... Manisha Batra, J. (Oral). 1. The instant petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking benefit of regular bail in case arising out of FIR No.93, dated 19.05.2024, registered under Section 21 of the NDPS Act, at Police Station Bhikhi, District Mansa. 2. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been in custody since 01.03.2026. Previously also, he had remained in custody for a period of 01 month and 13 days. He had been declared a proclaimed offender. However, his absence was not intentional as he was arrested in a case bearing FIR No.169, dated 25.11.2024, registered at Police Station Barnala and could not be released as he failed to furnish surety. The trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. No useful purpose would be served by detaining him in custody anymore. It is, therefore, HARJEET KAUR 2026.07.24 14:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-26055-2026 (O&M) -2- argued that the petition deserves to be allowed. 3. Per contra, learned State counsel has argued that the petitioner is a habitual offender being involved in as many as 04 cases. There are chances of his absconding again, if extended benefit of bail. It is, therefore, stressed that the petition does not deserve to be allowed. 4. This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 5. The petitioner had misused the concession of bail granted to him earlier and was declared a proclaimed person. He was arrested on 01.03.2026. He has remained in custody for a period of over 06 months and 06 days. The trial will certainly take considerable time to conclude. The contraband allegedly recovered was of intermediate quantity. As such, rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are not attracted in this case. Taking into consideration the above discussed facts and circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner has made out a case for release on bail. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing personal as well as surety bonds to the extent of two sureties in the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned trial Court/CJM/Duty Magistrate concerned, and subject to the conditions that he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case. He shall appear before the learned trial Court on each and every date of hearing except when his presence has been exempted by the trial Court. He shall surrender his passport, if any, furnish details of his cell phone and Aadhar card, and shall not change his mobile number(s) and shall keep his mobile phone switch on HARJEET KAUR 2026.07.24 14:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-26055-2026 (O&M) -3- all times during the pendency of the trial. He shall visit the Police Station concerned on the first Monday of every alternative month during the trial of the case. 6. It is clarified that the observations made above shall not be construed as an expression of opinion of this Court on the merits of the case and shall not influence the outcome of the trial in any manner. 7. Since the main petition has already been disposed of, pending application, if any, is rendered infructuous. (MANISHA BATRA) 23.07.2026 JUDGE harjeet Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No HARJEET KAUR 2026.07.24 14:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document