[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sonu Alias Billa vs State Of Punjab on 24 April, 2026
CRM-M-21084-2026 (O&M)
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
223 CRM-M-21084-2026 (O&M)
Date of decision : 24.04.2026
Sonu @Bill
..... Petitioner
VERSUS
State of Punjab
..... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA PARTAP SINGH
Present : Mr. Sumit Dua, Advocate for the petitioner.
*****
SURYA PARTAP SINGH, J.
This petition for bail is the first petition filed by the petitioner
under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. It has
been filed with regard to a case arising out of FIR No.71 dated 17.03.2018,
for the commission of offence punishable under Section 22 [Section 29
added later on] of ,
Police Station Kotwali, District Kapurthala.
2. The FIR of this case came into being at the instance of 'Satpal
Singh', Assistant Superintendent, Central Jail, Jalandhar, Kapurthala, who
had reported that on 17.03.2018 at about 01:45 P.M., during a meeting of
prisoners, petitioner Sonu @Billa (already lodged in an NDPS case) was
searched by Warder 'Tarlochan Singh' and 350 intoxicant tablets (38.85 gm
Buprenorphine) were recovered from the his possession. As per prosecution,
during the course of interrogation, he disclosed that the contraband had been
supplied by his brother 'Manvir Singh' and 'Amandeep Singh', who had
CRM-M-21084-2026 (O&M)
come to meet him and smuggled the same into the jail and thereafter,
'Manvir Singh' along with co-accused 'Amanpreet Singh' was apprehended
at the jail gate.
3. It is the case of the prosecution that pursuant to
abovementioned recovery, requisite formalities with regard to seizure &
sealing of contraband, filing of FIR and formal arrest of the accused were
completed and further investigation taken up.
4. Notice of motion.
5. appears on behalf of
respondent-State. Hence service of notice upon the State is hereby dispensed
with. The learned State Counsel has filed custody certificate of the
petitioner. The same be taken on record. No formal reply has been filed by
the State. However, the learned State Counsel has orally opposed the present
petition.
6. Heard.
7. The record has been perused carefully.
8. A perusal of the record shows that the petitioner who has been
facing trial for the commission of offence punishable under Sections 22 and
29 of the NDPS Act was enlarged on bail by virtue of an order dated
20.09.2018 and thereafter, he participated in the trial. As per record, on
11.09.2025 when the petitioner could not appear before the Court, his bail
was cancelled and his bail bonds were forfeited to the State. Subsequently,
on 22.12.2025 the petitioner was declared a proclaimed offender. The record
CRM-M-21084-2026 (O&M)
further shows that subsequently, i.e. on 10.02.2026, the petitioner
surrendered before the Court and since then he is in custody.
9. A perusal of the record further shows that there are several
factors which are required to be taken into consideration at this stage. Those
factors are:-
(i) that earlier the benefit of bail was accorded to the
petitioner and the petitioner continued to participate in
the trial for a period of more than seven years;
(ii) that after re-arrest the petitioner is already in custody for
a period of two and half months.
(iii) that the trial is not likely to be concluded in near future;
(iv) that nothing has been left to be recovered from the
possession of petitioner;
(v) that the detention of the petitioner in judicial lock-up will
not serve any purpose;
10. If the cumulative effect of all the abovementioned factors,
involved in the instant case, is taken into consideration, it leads to a
conclusion that the petitioner is entitled for the benefit of fresh bail, and that
the present petition deserves to be allowed.
11. Accordingly, without commenting anything on the merits of the
case, the present petition is hereby allowed. The petitioner is hereby ordered
to be released on bail on furnishing personal bond and surety bond(s) to the
CRM-M-21084-2026 (O&M)
satisfaction of learned trial Court. However the abovementioned concession
shall be subject to following conditions:-
(i) that the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any
inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with
the facts of the case, so as to dissuade him to disclose such facts
to the Court or to any other authority.
(ii) that the petitioner shall at the time of execution of bond, furnish
the address to the Court concerned and shall notify the change
in address to the trial Court, till the final decision of the trial;
and
(iii) that the petitioner shall not leave India without prior permission
of the trial Court.
(SURYA PARTAP SINGH)
JUDGE
24.04.2026
Vinod
Whether speaking / reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
