CRM-M/27750/2026 of MANDEEP SINGH Vs STATE OF PUNJAB on 21 July 2026

1. This second petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS of 2023 earlier section 439 of Cr.PC for the grant of Regular Bail to the petitioner in Case FIR NO.103 dated 30.06.2025 Under Sections 21, 29 OF NDPS Act, 1985 registered at Police Station Sadar Nawanshahr, District SBS Nagar (Nawanshahr)

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner was nominated in the present case on the basis of the disclosure statement suffered by co-accused Abhishek @ Abhi, who was apprehended along with co-accused Santosh Kumari and from whose possession 350 grams of heroin was recovered. During interrogation, co-accused Abhishek @ Abhi disclosed that he had been purchasing heroin from the present petitioner.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner RENU RAWAT

Chandigarh has been falsely implicated in the present case and has been nominated solely on the basis of the disclosure statement allegedly suffered by co-accused Abhishek @ Abhi. It is contended that the alleged disclosure statement of the co-accused, by itself, is not sufficient to connect the petitioner with the alleged recovery of 350 grams of heroin effected from the co-accused. No recovery whatsoever has been effected from the conscious possession of the petitioner, nor is there any independent or corroborative evidence connecting him with the alleged contraband.

4. Notice of motion.

5. Mr. Subhash Godara, Addl. Advocate General, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and vehemently opposes the prayer for grant of regular bail. Learned State counsel has filed the custody certificate of the petitioner in Court today, which is taken on record. As per the custody certificate, the petitioner is in custody for the last 03 months and 25 days.

6. I have heard the submissions made by the parties and gone through the record.

7. After hearing the rival contentions and considering the fact that in the case in hand, the petitioner is in custody for the last 03 months and 25 days; apart from the disclosure statement there is no evidence to connect the petitioner with the alleged offence coupled with the fact that the trial is likely to take considerable time, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served by further incarceration of the petitioner. RENU RAWAT

Chandigarh

Accordingly, the petitioner is granted the concession of regular bail during the pendency of the trial.

8. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.

9. Nothing discussed hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

10. It is clarified that if while on bail so granted through the instant order, the petitioner is found indulged in any other criminal case/activity, it shall be open to the State to seek cancellation of his bail.

(H.S.GREWAL) 21.07.2026

JUDGE renu

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No RENU RAWAT

Chandigarh