CRM-M-36542-2026 1 216 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-36542-2026 Date of Decision: 02.09.2026 GURPREET SINGH ALIAS GOPI ...Petitioner Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB ...Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL Present: Mr. Vipin Mahajan, Senior Advocate with Ms. Chandanpreet Kaur Ahluwalia, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Baljinder Singh Sra, Addl. AG, Punjab and Ms. Navreet Kaur, AAG, Punjab. VIRINDER AGGARWAL , J. (Oral) 1. The present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Section 439 Cr.P.C.) for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 26 dated 30.04.2025, registered under Sections 21, 25 and 29 of the NDPS Act, 1985, Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 and Section 61(2) of the BNS, 2023 (corresponding to Section 120- B IPC), at Police Station State Special Operation Cell, Amritsar, District Intelligence Wing, CID, Amritsar, Punjab. It is the second petition seeking the aforesaid relief. 2. As per the prosecution version, on receipt of secret information regarding involvement of accused Manpreet Singh @ Monu, Ranjit Singh @ Jeeta and Sunny in the supply of narcotics, the police party laid a naka and apprehended the aforesaid persons. Upon their search, 1 kg 08 grams of heroin was allegedly recovered. The police also recovered one 9 mm pistol along with two magazines of 9 mm. During investigation, accused Manpreet Singh @ Monu allegedly suffered a disclosure statement, on the basis whereof the KUMUD VERMA 2026.09.05 19:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-36542-2026 2 present petitioner, along with co-accused Prabhat Singh and Mohanpreet Singh, was nominated in the present case. Pursuant thereto, 263 grams of heroin was allegedly recovered from an open place near a rainwater drain in village Babowal, at the instance of the petitioner.It is further the prosecution case that the petitioner was already in custody in FIR No.14 dated 09.03.2025, registered at Police Station State Special Operation Cell, Amritsar, under the provisions of the NDPS Act and the Arms Act, and was subsequently taken on production warrant in the present case. The present petitioner is accordingly alleged to be involved in the offence on the basis of the disclosure statement of co-accused and the consequential recovery of 263 grams of heroin. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and that there is no direct recovery of contraband from his person. He submits that the petitioner was already in custody in another case when he was nominated in the present case and has been falsely implicated therein. No recovery was effected from the person or possession of the petitioner. The alleged recovery of heroin was effected from an open and accessible place, which was not in the exclusive possession or control of the petitioner. It is further contended that, since the petitioner was already in custody in another case at the relevant time, there was no occasion or possibility for him to have concealed the alleged contraband at the place from where the recovery is stated to have been effected. Learned counsel, accordingly, submits that the alleged recovery does not connect the petitioner with the contraband. 3.1 Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is serving in the Indian Army as a Naik and has already been granted the concession of KUMUD VERMA 2026.09.05 19:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-36542-2026 3 regular bail in FIR No.14 dated 19.03.2025, registered under the provisions of the NDPS Act and the Arms Act. It is further submitted that the investigation in the present case stands completed, challan has been presented and the petitioner is no longer required for custodial interrogation. Petitioner had earlier approached the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur, seeking regular bail, which was declined vide order dated 11.09.2025. Thereafter, the petitioner filed CRM-M-56202 of 2026 before this Court, which was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 11.03.2026. 4. Notice of motion. 5. Ms. Navreet Kaur, AAG, Punjab, who is present in Court accepts notice on behalf of the State and has filed the custody certificate dated 01.09.2026 and status report by way of affidavit of DSP, State Special Operation Cell, Amritsar, on behalf of respondent/State. 6. As per the status report filed on behalf of the respondent-State, the investigation in the present case stands concluded and the challan has already been presented before the learned Trial Court. It is further submitted that the petitioner was nominated during the course of investigation on the basis of the disclosure statement of co-accused and was subsequently arrested in the present case on production warrant. The State has relied upon the material collected during investigation, including the alleged recovery effected pursuant to the disclosure statement of the petitioner, to oppose the grant of bail. It is further submitted that the petitioner is also involved in another case registered under the provisions of the NDPS Act and the Arms Act, wherein he is stated to be on bail. As regards the present case, 23 prosecution witnesses have been cited, charges have already been framed and the trial is in progress. KUMUD VERMA 2026.09.05 19:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-36542-2026 4 The examination-in-chief of three prosecution witnesses has been completed and the matter is now fixed for prosecution evidence. 7. This Court has considered the rival submissions and perused the record. 8. Be that as it may, this Court has considered the rival submissions and the material available on record. The allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner is alleged to be having links with cross-border smugglers and to have been receiving consignments of heroin from across the border for further supply. In the present case, it is alleged that the petitioner had obtained the heroin consignment from two Pakistani smugglers and, being their handler, was involved in the further movement and supply of the contraband. It is further alleged that, as the petitioner did not have information regarding the further supply of the heroin, he kept the packet concealed at the disclosed place, from where recovery was subsequently effected. 9. Though learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the alleged recovery of 263 grams of heroin was effected from an open and accessible place and that the petitioner was already in custody in another case at the relevant time, thereby contending that there was no occasion for him to have concealed the contraband at the disclosed place, the aforesaid contention, at this stage, cannot be examined in isolation from the other material collected during investigation. The alleged recovery is of commercial quantity of heroin and, therefore, the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are attracted. At this stage, this Court is required to consider whether there are reasonable grounds KUMUD VERMA 2026.09.05 19:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-36542-2026 5 for believing that the petitioner is not guilty of the alleged offence and whether he is unlikely to commit any offence while on bail. 10. The prosecution has further relied upon the disclosure statement of the co-accused pursuant to which the petitioner was nominated in the present case and has attributed a specific role to the petitioner in relation to the alleged cross-border procurement and further supply of heroin. It is also the case of the prosecution that, in another case, the petitioner was allegedly found to be involved in an offence under the NDPS Act and the Arms Act, wherein recovery of 135 grams of heroin along with a .32 bore pistol, magazine and three live cartridges was allegedly effected from his house on the basis of the disclosure statement of the co-accused. Though the petitioner has been granted bail in FIR No. 14 dated 19.03.2025, the said circumstance is also relevant while considering the overall material placed before this Court. 11. The quantity involved in the present case, coupled with the nature of allegations regarding the petitioner's alleged links with cross-border smugglers, the alleged procurement of narcotic consignments and the material regarding recovery pursuant to his disclosure statement, does not enable this Court to record, at this stage, a satisfaction that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the petitioner is not guilty of the alleged offences. Consequently, the twin conditions prescribed under Section 37 of the NDPS Act cannot be said to have been satisfied. It is also relevant that the investigation in the present case stands completed, challan has been presented and charges have already been framed. However, mere completion of investigation and filing of the challan, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, would not by itself entitle the petitioner to the concession of KUMUD VERMA 2026.09.05 19:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-36542-2026 6 regular bail, particularly when the allegations involve commercial quantity of a narcotic substance and the statutory embargo contained in Section 37 of the NDPS Act is attracted. 12. In view of the nature and gravity of the allegations, the commercial quantity of heroin involved, the alleged links of the petitioner with cross-border smugglers, the material collected during investigation and the statutory bar contained in Section 37 of the NDPS Act, this Court is not satisfied that the petitioner has made out a case for grant of regular bail. 13. Consequently, the present second petition for regular bail is dismissed. (VIRINDER AGGARWAL) JUDGE 02.09.2026 kv Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No KUMUD VERMA 2026.09.05 19:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh