[Cites 11, Cited by 0]
Punjab-Haryana High Court
Inderjit Singh vs State Of Punjab on 19 February, 2026
CRM-M-66060-2025 (O&M) - 1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-66060-2025 (O&M)
Reserved on : 03.02.2026
Pronounced on : 19.02.2026
Uploaded on : 19.02.2026
Whether only operative part of the judgment is
pronounced or the full Judgment is pronounced: Full Judgment
INDERJIT SINGH
...PETITIONER
VS.
STATE OF PUNJAB
... RESPONDENT
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHEEL NAGU, CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY
Present:- Mr.Gurminder Singh, Senior Advocate (arguing counsel), with
Mr. K.S. Kharbanda, Advocate, and
Mr. Puneet Bali, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Mr. Ajitpal Singh Mander, Addl. Advocate General, Punjab.
*****
SANJIV BERRY, J.
1. The petitioner has preferred the third instant petition under Section
483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 praying for grant
of Regular Bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.1 dated 12.06.2017 (Annexure
P-1) registered at Police Station: Special Task Force, Phase-IV, Mohali, District
SAS Nagar (Mohali), Punjab, under Section 59(2) (b) of NDPS Act, read with
Sections 218, 466, 471, 120-B, IPC (Section 21, 22 of NDPS Act and Section
384, 409, 482 IPC and Section 25 of Arms Act added later on).
2. It is apt to mention here that earlier bail application i.e BA-965 of
2020 preferred before Special Court, SAS Nagar (Mohali) had been dismissed
1 of 6
CRM-M-66060-2025 (O&M) - 2-
vide order dated 23.06.2020 (Annexure P-13). Then petitioner filed bail
application CRM-M-19751-2020 before this Court and vide order dated
07.08.2020 the same was dismissed (Annexure P-14). Thereafter petitioner filed
second bail application CRM-M-14720-2021 but the same was dismissed vide
order dated 17.02.2023 (Annexure P-15). Petitioner challenged the same before
Hon'ble Supreme Court vide SLP (Criminal) Diary No. 32299-2023 which
eventually was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 18.10.2023 (Annexure
P-16). After some time petitioner again filed bail application BA-3824-2024
before the Special Court, SAS Nagar (Mohali) and vide order dated 11.12.2024
(Annexure P-17) the same was again dismissed.
3. Learned Senior counsel representing the petitioner had inter alia
contended that the petitioner who was serving as Inspector in Punjab Police and
had been a part of various operations leading arrest of drug traffickers, got
commendation and appreciation certificates, besides gallantry award as well. He
submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case and the
alleged recovery has been planted just to ruin the career of the petitioner. The
allegations levelled in the FIR are baseless and fictitious. It is contended that
co-accused of the petitioner namely Ajaib Singh and Sahib Singh had already
been granted concession of regular bail. He submits that the petitioner is in
custody since 12.06.2017 and the conclusion of trial will take sufficient time.
He further pointed out that even the witnesses examined by the prosecution are
discrepant and the prosecution will not be able to substantiate its case against the
petitioner in any manner. He submits that petitioner is lingering in custody for
last more than 8 years, as such, the prayer for grant of bail has been made.
4. Per Contra, learned State counsel has strongly assailed these
arguments by submitting that no doubt the petitioner had been the part of the
2 of 6
CRM-M-66060-2025 (O&M) - 3-
police party in many operations but the fact remains that the petitioner is
involved in drug trafficking and has been instrumental in the acquittal of the
accused wherein huge recovery of narcotics had been effected being the
Investigation Officer thereof. He contends that huge quantity of arms and
ammunition besides 4 kg of heroin and 3 kg smack, vehicles with fictitious
numbers have been recovered from the petitioner along with Indian as well as
foreign currency notes, which speaks volumes of his involvement in the crime.
He submits that the prosecution has examined all the witnesses cited by the
prosecution and the case is fixed for recording the statement of the accused. He
submits that the nature and gravity of the offence did not make any case for
grant of bail in favour of the petitioner and as such prayed for dismissal of the
bail petition.
5. We have considered the respective arguments and also gone through
the record.
6. Briefly stating the facts of the case, the petitioner while being the
incharge CIA staff Tarn Taran had investigated 3 FIR's wherein the cases
involved heavy recovery of narcotics. The accused were acquitted on account of
discrepancies in performing duties and not giving proper evidence in Court by
the petitioner. After inquiry in the matter, FIR was registered against the
petitioner and Jaswant Singh DSP. During course of investigation, petitioner
was arrested on 12.06.2017 and on raid being conducted at his quarter, 41 live
cartridges of 12 bore, 43 live cartridges of 315 bore, 60 live cartridges of 32
bore, 66 live cartridges of 9mm, 115 live cartridges of AK-47, 25 live cartridges
of 7.62 mm, 33 live cartridges of 30 bore, 2 magazines of AK-47, 2 magazine
of 32 bore, 2 magazine of 9mm, 1 magazine of 22 bore, 1 revolver 38 bore, 1
3 of 6
CRM-M-66060-2025 (O&M) - 4-
pistol 9mm, 1 rifle AK-47 along with 1 magazine, 4 mobile phones besides one
Innova car, ₹16,50,000/- and 3550 pounds (UK Currency) were recovered.
6.1 During interrogation, he disclosed having given one 32 bore
revolver along with some cartridges to ASI Ajaib Singh and further disclosed
having kept some smack and heroin in a rented room in Ludhiana. When the
police party raided at Ludhiana, the petitioner disclosed that he had given such
statement just to mislead the police party and further gave disclosure statement
that he had kept smack and heron in quarter No.3 Police Station Sadar Phagwara
which only he knows and can get the same recovered, thereafter he lead the
police party to the disclosed place and got recovered 4 kg of heroin and 3 kg of
smack.
6.2 In the meanwhile, the police party also got recovered from ASI
Ajaib Singh .32 bore revolver, 28 live cartridges of 32 bore along with 43 live
cartridges of other bores and some psychotropic capsules and injections.
6.3 Subsequently, on the basis of another disclosure statement made
by the petitioner led to recovery of 1 more AK-47 2 magazines and 30 rounds
from a house in Amritsar along with 1 scorpio car bearing fake registration
number.
6.4 During course of investigation, it was found that the petitioner by
threatening accused Gurjit Singh from whom narcotics was recovered, had got
transferred the property in the name of one of his associate. It has also came in
the statement of Kuljit Kaur wife of Gurjit Singh that although amount of
₹60,00,000/- was recovered by police from their house but the recovery shown
was of only ₹36,00,000/- in the FIR and ₹24,00,000/- had been
misappropriated. She further claimed to have given ₹35,00,000/- to the
4 of 6
CRM-M-66060-2025 (O&M) - 5-
petitioner for the bail of her husband and another ₹28,00,000/- was given by her
father-in-law to the petitioner through Sahib Singh.
6.5 After completion of investigation, challan has been presented in the
Court, wherein the charges were framed and the prosecution have cited 59
witnesses and prosecution had examined and closed its evidence, now the case is
fixed for the statement of the accused.
7. Custody certificate has been produced in the Court which reveals
that the petitioner is having 3 more criminal cases registered against him apart
from the present FIR along with one ECIR registered under PMLA.
8. Learned Senior counsel representing the petitioner has assailed the
version of the prosecution by submitting that there are material discrepancies in
the statements of the prosecution witnesses which are sufficient to establish the
fact that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. He further
submits that the petitioner has no concern with the alleged recoveries and there
has been tampering of evidences by the police but the fact remains that all these
aspects are to be appreciated during course of trial by the learned trial Court.
9. As stated above, the prosecution has already concluded its evidence
and the trial is now fixed for the statement of the accused. In other words the
trial of the prosecution is nearing culmination and all the aspects raised by
learned counsel for the petitioner could very well be appreciated and adjudicated
by the learned trial Court.
10. The huge recovery of arms and ammunition, Indian as well as
foreign currency notes coupled with heavy recovery of narcotics viz. 4 kg of
heroin and 3 kg of smack from the conscious possession of the petitioner speak
volume against the petitioner qua his active involvement in such illegal
activities. The huge recovery of narcotics, weapons as well as the fact that 3
5 of 6
CRM-M-66060-2025 (O&M) - 6-
more criminal cases along with 1 ECIR registered under PMLA is pending
against the petitioner, disentitle him from claiming parity with co-accused
Ajaib Singh and Sahib Singh. Therefore, considering the serious nature and
gravity of offence coupled with the fact that trial against the petitioner is nearing
culmination, we find no case being made out in favour of the petitioner for grant
of bail.
11. Accordingly, in the light of the above discussion, the regular bail
petition is hereby dismissed.
12. However, considering the progress of trial, we expect for
expeditious conclusion of trial by the learned trial Court.
13. Any observations made above shall not effect the merit of the case.
14. Pending applications, if any, shall stands disposed of.
(SANJIV BERRY) (SHEEL NAGU)
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE
Dated: 19.02.2026
Gyan
i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No
ii) Whether reportable? Yes/No
6 of 6
