Jorawar Singh alias Jora vs State of Punjab

Prayer in the present petition preferred by the petitioner under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘the BNSS’) is for the grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.83 dated 20.04.2026 registered under Sections 21(C), 25 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘the NDPS Act’), at Police Station ANTF (Anti-Narcotics Force), Amritsar, District ANTF Wing, Amritsar.

As per the case of the prosecution, on 20.04.2026, a secret information was received that Jarman Singh, Simran Singh and Jora Singh (petitioner) were involved in smuggling of heroin at a very high scale and that on 19.04.2026, they had brought heroin from Pakistan through a smuggler. All three of them had collected heroin from there and that Jarman Singh and Simran Singh were on a motorcycle and could be apprehended. Accordingly, Jarman Singh and Simran Singh were apprehended. In their disclosure statements, they stated that the petitioner was their associate and was actively involved in the smuggling of heroin. They also named three others persons namely Gurjant Singh, Navdeep Singh and Gurpreet Singh stating that they were the persons who used to collect the consignments of heroin in accordance with the directions received from the smugglers from Pakistan. Under the circumstances, the petitioner was arraigned as an accused.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated. He submits that though the name of the petitioner surfaced in the secret information, he was not apprehended at the spot and, therefore, no recovery was made from him. He submits that the name of the petitioner has falsely been introduced by the police by extracting a disclosure statement from the accused, who had been arrested from the spot while they were in custody. He also states that apart from the disclosure statement, there is no other evidence against the petitioner. He submits that the antecedents of the petitioner are clean and that he is willing to join investigation and abide by any condition imposed by the Court.

Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the bail application stating that the petitioner was named in the secret information coupled with the disclosure statements of the accused, who had been arrested with the contraband. He submits that under the circumstances, custodial interrogation of the petitioner would be required,

I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties.

Concededly, a huge consignment of heroin weighing 1 Kg. 80 grams which is four times the commercial quantity prescribed for heroin was recovered from Jarman Singh on his arrest. Jarman Singh then named the present petitioner and other persons in his disclosure statement. No doubt, the antecedents of the petitioner are clean and no other case stands registered against him. However, the anticipatory bail application of co-accused Gurjant Singh was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 21.07.2026 passed in CRM-M No.37528 of 2026 against whom there were similar allegations. Still further, mere clear antecedents at this stage alone would not be a sufficient ground to extend the concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. It is well known that the menace of drugs has spread its tentacles far and wide and in such cases, where a commercial quantity has been recovered, the petitioner was named in the secret information and then by the accused from whom the contraband had been recovered, custodial interrogation is imperative to elicit the truth.

Keeping in view the nature of the allegations, this Court does not find it to be a case where the concession of anticipatory bail should be extended to the petitioner.

That being so, the petition is found to be devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed.

However, nothing stated herein above shall be construed to be an opinion on the merits of the case.