Gujarat High Court
Balwinder Singh Sajan Singh vs The State Of Gujarat on 31 July, 2025
Author: Ilesh J. Vora
Bench: Ilesh J. Vora
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1485/2025 ORDER DATED: 31/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL (TEMPORARY BAIL) NO. 1485 of 2025
==========================================================
BALWINDER SINGH SAJAN SINGH
Versus
THE STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
THROUGH JAIL for the Appellant(s) No. 1
KSHITIJ M AMIN(7572) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 3
NOTICE SERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 2
MR LB DABHI, APP for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL
Date : 31/07/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL)
1. The appellant - Balwinder Singh Sajan Singh has preferred the present appeal through jail for grant of temporary bail for 30 days since his application for temporary bail was rejected by the Designated Court under the NIA Act vide order dated 11.4.2025 in NIA Criminal Misc. Application No.7 of 2025.
2. The main contention raised in the application through jail is to the effect that the appellant has personal Page 1 of 8 Uploaded by H.M. PATHAN(HC00167) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:54:07 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1485/2025 ORDER DATED: 31/07/2025 undefined issues with his wife due to uncertainty faced by her because of the instant case and she needs divorce on mutual consent without hurting feelings of the appellant. It is also contended that the appellant is unable to told his wife as to when he will come out of jail and she has lost faith on the assurance given by him and the fact remains that even after 45 months of custody only 27 out of 610 listed witnesses are examined and that she want to move away from the known persons and wanted to settle a fresh life in bigger city in the interest of future of their son. It is also contended that the appellant has been falsely implicated in this case and even assuming without accepting original version of the chargesheet against the appellant that he was carrying 700 gms contraband substance which was to be delivered to Imtiyaz Ahmed and thus has stated that he is not accused of receiving any delivery from Imtiyaz Ahmed which is accused of interacting with Afghan nationals so as to link seizure from the present appellant with that of the drugs seized from Mundra Port. It is further contended that NIA has not produced any evidence connecting him with Imtiyaz Page 2 of 8 Uploaded by H.M. PATHAN(HC00167) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:54:07 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1485/2025 ORDER DATED: 31/07/2025 undefined Ahmed or any Afghan national to link him with the drugs seized from Mundra Port. It is further contended that NIA has filed the reply as if everything is going well between the appellant and his wife. However, it is stated that the appellant is fighting to save his marriage and NIA's contention is that divorce petition is not filed before any Court is inhumane. That his brother Sukhwinder Singh @ Happy is living on his own working as a labourer and cannot financially support the appellant's wife and his son. That NIA's contention of tampering the witnesses is baseless since all the witnesses relevant to the present case are from Punjab Police and the question of compromise with them does not arise. That the contention of NIA regarding criminal antecedent is related to FIR No.109 of 2013 of Fatehgarh Sahib Police Station, Punjab has no connection with the instant case and that is bailed out in the said case and has thus prayed for sympathetic consideration of his helpless condition since his life will be meaningless without his wife and son. That NIA cannot cherry pick of their conversation with his wife to suit their convenience and Page 3 of 8 Uploaded by H.M. PATHAN(HC00167) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:54:07 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1485/2025 ORDER DATED: 31/07/2025 undefined thereby misleading the Court to prove that there is problem amongst the couple. That as per the judgment of the Honourable Apex Court in the case of Rabi Prakash Vs state of Odisha, reported in (2023) SCC Online SC 1109 wherein it is clearly highlighted right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution which precedes the bar against granting bail under section 37 of NDPS Act. That his family perish by the time the remaining 583/610 witnesses are completed. That NIA has failed to reveal the fact that his wife has left the house due to difference of opinion with the mother of the present appellant and because of strain relationship with the family, the wife of the appellant wanted to handle the said issue with the family members of the appellant in his own terms and this was the reason that family members were not aware of anything going on between the appellant and his wife and has thus prayed to grant him temporary bail for 30 days.
3. Learned advocate Mr.Kshitij Amin relying upon the affidavit-in-reply filed by the Deputy Superintendent of Page 4 of 8 Uploaded by H.M. PATHAN(HC00167) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:54:07 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1485/2025 ORDER DATED: 31/07/2025 undefined Police, NIA, Ahmedabad has vehemently opposed the appeal on the ground that there is ample material with regard to involvement of the appellant accused (accused No.18) in drug cartel which is controlled by the wanted accused operating from Afghanistan in India via Iran and his involvement with other co-accused in storing, purification and distributing drugs amongst the general public in Punjab, Delhi, Gujarat, UP and other States of India to raise huge funds / drugs proceeds to support anti-national activities against the India.
4. It is also argued that the application for jail transfer preferred by the appellant was rejected twice and the temporary bail application of the appellant was rejected for five times by the learned trial Court as well as High Court and that learned Special Judge, NDPS Fatehgard Sahib Punjab vide judgment and order dated 14.1.2015 where the appellant was sentenced for 10 years rigorous imprisonment and was also imposed a fine of Rs.1 lakh for the FIR registered against him bearing No.109 of 2013 dated Page 5 of 8 Uploaded by H.M. PATHAN(HC00167) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:54:07 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1485/2025 ORDER DATED: 31/07/2025 undefined 19.6.2013 before the Fatehgarh Sahib Police Station, Punjab under the provisions of sections 21 and 22 of the NDPS Act.
5. It is also argued that the report submitted by the Police Station, Jandiala Guru, Amritsar (Rural) does not reflect the factum of any divorce case being filed or problem with the husband and wife with regard to matrimonial dispute is not known to any of the members coupled with the fact that the present appellant is involved in high profile case in drugs trafficking and is involved in drugs racket business and the area where the present appellant is residing is known where other dangerous drugs traffickers rather imprisoned or absconding and there are all chances that they may harm the present appellant in some way or the other which might lead to detriment to law and order situation and has thus argued to reject the appeal.
6. We have perused the appeal of the appellant preferred through jail. We have also perused the order Page 6 of 8 Uploaded by H.M. PATHAN(HC00167) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:54:07 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1485/2025 ORDER DATED: 31/07/2025 undefined rejecting the bail application of the appellant passed by learned Designated Court in NIA Criminal Misc. Application No.7 of 2025 dated 11.4.2025. We have also perused the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of the NIA by Girish Gothwal, Deputy Superintendent of Police, National Investigation Agency, Ahmedabad. It transpires that in very systematic manner, entire drugs cartel is operating through various persons in India where the present appellant is also one of them, the question of accused knowing each other or not is immaterial at this stage, more particularly, when huge quantity of drugs of almost 2988.21 kg of heroin has been seized from the container by DRI, Gandhidham and the modus operandi of drugs cartel is very well explained in the affidavit-in-reply and merely because the appellant is caught red-handed with small quantity of drugs, it cannot be said that there is no prima facie case against the appellant in relation to the drugs seized at Gandhidham.
7. As far as granting temporary bail is concerned, we are not inclined to exercise discretionary powers in Page 7 of 8 Uploaded by H.M. PATHAN(HC00167) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:54:07 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1485/2025 ORDER DATED: 31/07/2025 undefined favour of the appellant when serious allegations are levelled against the appellant which prima facie surfaces from the case papers, more particularly, reasons stated in the temporary bail application preferred through jail does not repose any confidence in view of the report submitted by the Police Station, Jandiala Guru, Amritsar (Rural). Hence, no case is made out for temporary bail coupled with the fact that twin conditions of section 37 of the NDPS Act being not satisfied, the appeal stands rejected. Notice is discharged.
(ILESH J. VORA,J) (P. M. RAVAL, J) H.M. PATHAN Page 8 of 8 Uploaded by H.M. PATHAN(HC00167) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:54:07 IST 2025