CRM-M/50452/2026 of SANDEEP SNIGH ALIAS SEEP Vs STATE OF PUNJAB on 11 September 2026

213

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CRM-M No.50452 of 2026 Date of Decision:- 11.09.2026

Sandeep Singh @ Seep …..Petitioner. Versus State of Punjab .....Respondent. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL ***** Present:- Ms. Janya Sirohi, Advocate

for the petitioner.

Mr. Ravneet Singh Lekhi, AAG, Punjab.

VIKRAM AGGARWAL, J. (ORAL)

This is the second petition preferred under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘the BNSS’) for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.15 dated 20.01.2025 registered at Police Station Gharinda, District Amritsar, under Sections 21(C) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘the NDPS Act’), the first having been withdrawn on 21.07.2026 (Annexure P-4).

2. Custody certificate dated 10.09.2026 filed in Court today, is taken on record. The Registry is directed to tag the same at an appropriate place on the case file.

3. On 20.01.2025, on the basis of a secret information, two persons namely Harbaj Singh alias Baaj and Sandeep Singh @ Seep (petitioner) were apprehended. One of them is alleged to have thrown a YAG DUTT

CRM-M No.50452 of 2026 -2-

packet in the nearby fields, which upon checking, was found to contain 500 grams heroin.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated. He submits that since the heroin is alleged to have been thrown by one of the persons, the name of whom has not been disclosed, it cannot be said to be a case of conscious possession. Learned counsel further submits that co-accused Harbaj Singh @ Baaj Singh has been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 24.08.2026 passed in CRM-M No.26769 of 2026 and the case of the petitioner is at par with the said Harbaj Singh @ Baaj Singh. He submits that on account of grant of regular bail to the said Harbaj Singh @ Baaj Singh, the petitioner has instituted the second petition for the grant of bail. He further submits that the petitioner is in custody right since the day of his arrest i.e. 20.01.2025; 01 year, 07 months and 19 days have gone by; antecedents of the petitioner are largely clean; investigation stands completed; charges stand framed on 19.04.2026, however, out of 17 prosecution witnesses, none has been examined; trial will take a sufficiently long time and, therefore, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody any longer.

5. Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the bail application stating that a commercial quantity of heroin is alleged to have been recovered from the petitioner and, therefore, rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act would apply.

6. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties.

7. The allegations in the FIR are vague. It has not been specified YAG DUTT

CRM-M No.50452 of 2026 -3-

as to who had thrown the packet. Still further, as to whether it would be taken to be a case of conscious possession or not, shall be determined at the stage of trial. Antecedents of the petitioner are largely clean barring another case under the NDPS Act registered after he was arrested in the present case. Investigation stands concluded. Final report stands submitted. Charges were framed on 19.04.2026, but out of 17 prosecution witnesses, none has been examined till date. It is, therefore, clear that trial will still take a sufficiently long time thereby prejudicing the right of the petitioner to a speedy trial. He is in custody for the last 01 year, 07 months and 19 days and, therefore, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody any longer.

8. Further, co-accused Harbaj Singh @ Baaj Singh has been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 24.08.2026 passed in CRM-M No.26769 of 2026 and the case of the petitioner is at par with him. The grant of bail to the said person entitles the petitioner to file and maintain this second petition for the grant of bail.

9. In view of the aforementioned facts and circumstances, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate.

(VIKRAM AGGARWAL) September 11, 2026

JUDGE Yag Dutt

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No

Whether Reportable: Yes/No YAG DUTT