Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sandeep Singh vs State Of Punjab on 3 November, 2025
Author: Jasjit Singh Bedi
Bench: Jasjit Singh Bedi
CRM-M-60000-2025 -1-
(238) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-60000-2025
Date of Decision: 03.11.2025
SANDEEP SINGH
... Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI
Present: Mr. Ruhani Chadha, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. M.S. Toor, A.A.G., Punjab.
****
JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J.
The prayer in this 2nd petition under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 is
for the grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No.95 dated 20.04.2024
registered under Section 21-C of NDPS Act (Section 29 of NDPS Act added
later on) at Police Station Jandiala, District Amritsar Rural.
2. The brief facts of the case are that Jagjit Singh alias Jagga Akash
and Sandeep Singh (petitioner) were found travelling in a car. 300 grams, 400
grams and 300 grams respectively of heroin came to be recovered from the
accused including the petitioner.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. The mandatory
provisions of Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act have not been complied
with in their proper perspective. No independent witness was joined at the
time of search and seizure. As the petitioner is a first-time offender, is in
1 of 6
custody since 20.04.2024 none of the 16 prosecution witnesses has been
examined so far, the trial of the present case is not likely to be concluded
anytime soon and therefore, he is entitled to the concession of bail in view of
the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Nitish Adhikary
@ Bapan Versus The State of West Bengal, SLP (Crl.) Nos.5769/2022
arising out of judgment and order dated 04.05.2022 in CRM(NDPS)
No.442/2022, decided on 01.08.2022 and Hasanujjaman & others Versus
The State of West Bengal, SLP (Crl.) No.(s).3221/2023 arising out of
impugned final judgment and order dated 29.11.2022 in CRM(NDPS)
No.1323/2022, decided on 04.05.2023.
4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel contends that
commercial quantity of contraband has been recovered from the petitioner.
Therefore, in view of the bar contained under Section 37 of the NDPS Act,
the petitioner is not entitled to the grant of bail. He, however, concedes that
the petitioner is a first-time offender, is in custody since 20.04.2024 and that
none of the 16 prosecution witnesses has been examined so far.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Nitish Adhikary @
Bapan Vs. The State of West Bengal SLP (Crl.) Nos.5769/2022 Decided on
01.08.2022 held as under:-
"As per the office report dated 29.07.2022, copy of the show
cause notice along with Special Leave Petition was supplied to the
Standing Counsel for the State of West Bengal and separate notice
has been served on the State also. However, no one has entered
2 of 6
appearance on their behalf.
The petitioner seeks enlargement on bail in F.I.R. No. 612 of
2020 dated 17.10.2020 filed under Section 21(c) and 37 of the
NDPS 2 Act, registered at Police Station Bongaon, West Bengal.
During the course of the hearing, we are informed that the
petitioner has undergone custody for a period of 01 year and 07
months as on 09.06.2022. The trial is at a preliminary stage, as
only one witness has been examined. The petitioner does not
have any criminal antecedents.
Taking into consideration the period of sentence undergone
by the petitioner and all the attending circumstances but without
expressing any views in the merits of the case, we are inclined to
grant bail to the petitioner.
The petitioner is accordingly, directed to be released on bail
subject to him furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial
Court.
The Special Leave Petition is disposed of on the aforestated
terms.
Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of."
7. In Hasanujjaman & others Versus The State of West Bengal,
SLP (Crl.) No.(s).3221/2023, decided on 04.05.2023, held as under:-
"1. There are three petitioners in this Special Leave
Petition, who were accused of committing an offence under
Sections 21(c)/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic
Substances Act, 1985 (for short, `NDPS Act') in FIR
No.18/2022, dated 09.01.2022, registered at Police Station
Islampur, District Murshidabad, West Bengal.
2. The allegations are that when the police party
intercepted the petitioners along with another person riding
on two motorcycles, they were found in possession of codeine
3 of 6
phosphate in a consignment of phensedyl bottles loaded in
two nylon bags. During the search, 115 bottles (100 ml.
each) of phensedyl were recovered from the joint possession
of the petitioners. They were arrested on the spot and have
been in custody for more than one year and four months.
3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and
carefully perused the record.
4. The investigation is complete; chargesheet has
been filed, though the charges are yet to be framed. The
conclusion of trial will, thus, take some reasonable time,
regardless of the direction issued by the High Court to
conclude the same within one year from the date of
framing of charges. The petitioners do not have any
criminal antecedents. There is, thus, substantial
compliance of Section 37 of the NDPS Act.
5. In such circumstances, but without expressing any
views on the merits of the case, we deem it appropriate to
release the petitioners on bail subject to the terms and
conditions as may be imposed by the Trial Court.
6. Additionally, it is clarified that in case the
petitioners are found involved in any other case under the
NDPS Act or other penal law, it shall amount to misuse of
the concession of bail granted to them today, and in such a
case, necessary consequences shall follow.
7. The petitioners are further directed to appear before
the Trial Court regularly. In the event of they being absent, it
shall again be taken as a misuse of concession of bail.
8. The Special Leave Petition stands disposed of in the
above terms.
9. As a result, pending interlocutory application also
stands disposed of.
4 of 6
(emphasis supplied)
8. Admittedly, in 'Nitish Adhikary @ Bapan' (supra) and
'Hasanujjaman & others' (supra), the accused therein had been granted the
concession of bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court after they had undergone
approximately one and a half years of custody. They were also first-time
offenders as is borne out from the orders.
9. In the instant case, the petitioner is stated to be in custody since
20.04.2024 none of the 16 prosecution witnesses has been examined so far.
He is also first-time offender with no other case registered against him. In
this situation, the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act can be diluted to an
extent in view of the salutary provisions of Article 21 of the Constitution of
India which provides for the right to a speedy trial and the case of the
petitioners can be considered for the grant of bail.
10. Thus without commenting on the merits of the case, the present
petition is allowed and the petitioner-Sandeep Singh S/o Dilbagh Singh is
ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds and surety
bonds to the satisfaction of learned CJM/Duty Magistrate, concerned.
11. The petitioner shall appear before the police station concerned
on the first Monday of every month till the conclusion of the trial and inform
in writing each time that he is not involved in any other crime other than the
present case.
12. In addition, the petitioner (or anyone on his behalf) shall prepare
an FDR in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- and deposit the same with the Trial
5 of 6
Court. The same would be liable to be forfeited as per law in case of the
absence of the petitioner from trial without sufficient cause.
13. The petition stands disposed of.
(JASJIT SINGH BEDI)
JUDGE
03.11.2025
JITESH Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No
Whether reportable:- Yes/No
6 of 6
