AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
H.S. Grewal, J.(Oral)
This petition has been filed under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 [Erstwhile Section 439 Cr.P.C.] praying for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 17 dated 28.10.2025 U/s 21(C) of NDPS Act [Section 23 and 29 of NDPS Act added lateron vide DDR No. 22 dated 30.10.2025], registered at Police Station State Special Operations Cell Fazilka, District Fazilka, Punjab.
The prosecution alleges that on 28.10.2025, co-accused Gurpreet Singh was apprehended and found in conscious possession of 5 kg heroin. During investigation, his disclosure statement implicated the present petitioner, alleging that the recovered contraband had been supplied by him.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not been named in the FIR and has been nominated solely on the basis of the disclosure statement of co-accused, which is not admissible in evidence against him. He further submits that nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. It is further submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 13.03.2026 and prays for grant of regular bail.
Notice of motion.
Mr. Subhash Godara, Addl. Advocate General, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. He has opposed the prayer for grant of regular bail on the ground that petitioner is involved in financing and illicit trafficking of narcotic substances/ drugs. He has filed the custody certificate of the petitioner in Court today, which is taken on record. As per the custody certificate, the petitioner is in custody for the last 05 months and 17 days and is involved in one more case.
I have heard the submissions made by the parties and gone through the record.
Considering that the petitioner is in custody for the last 5 months and 17 days, and that except disclosure statement made by the co-accused there is no other material connecting him with the alleged offence coupled with the likelihood of the trial taking considerable time, the Court held that further incarceration would serve no useful purpose and granted the petitioner regular bail during the pendency of the trial.
Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.
Nothing discussed hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
It is clarified that if while on bail so granted through the instant order, the petitioner is found indulged in any other criminal case/activity, it shall be open to the State to seek cancellation of his bail.