CRM-M/26495/2026 of GURSEWAK SINGH ALIAS SEWAK Vs STATE OF PUNJAB on 21 July 2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of Decision: 21.07.2026

GURSEWAK SINGH ALIAS SEWAK

....Petitioner

V/s

STATE OF PUNJAB

.…Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL

Present: Mr. A.S. Prajapati, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Rahul Jindal, AAG, Punjab.

*** VIKRAM AGGARWAL, J. (ORAL)

Prayer in the present petition preferred by the petitioner under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short the “BNSS”) is for the grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.04, dated 06.01.2026 under Sections 21 and 29 of NDPS Act, 1985 registered at Police Station Raja Sansi, District Amritsar, Punjab.

2. On 12.05.2026, the following order was passed by a Coordinate Bench:- “1. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 (Section 438 of Cr.P.C.) for grant of anticipatory bail in case bearing FIR No.04 dated 06.01.2026, under Sections 21, 29 of NDPS Act, 1985 registered at Police Station Raja Sansi, District Amritsar, Punjab.

2. Briefly stated, on 10.03.2026, co-accused namely Sharanjit Singh was apprehended and 06 grams of heroin was recovered from his possession. Later on, the present petitioner was nominated on the basis of a disclosure statement of the aforementioned co-accused. MANI KUMAR

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has been falsely involved in the present case on the basis of a disclosure statement of co-accused namely, Sharanjit Singh from whom 06 grams of heroin has allegedly been recovered. It is further contended that the alleged contraband falls under the category of intermediate quantity marginally above the small quantity and as such, bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act is not attracted in the present case; except the disclosure statement which is not admissible in the eyes of law, there is no incriminating evidence on record which supports the allegations; neither in the form of CDR (Call Details Record) nor any monetary transactions regarding complicity of the present petitioner in the commission of alleged offence; the petitioner is having clean antecedents and is not involved in any other case under the NDPS Act. Learned counsel prayed for anticipatory bail as the petitioner is ready to join the investigation and to fully co-operate with the same.

4. Notice of motion.

5. Mr. Anup Singh, AAG, Punjab, who is present in Court accepted notice on behalf of the respondent-State and opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner on the ground that the co-accused has specifically named the present petitioner as a supplier of the contraband recovered from the co-accused; present petitioner alongwith co-accused is involved in drug trafficking. He further, contended that the petitioner is involved in two more cases, however the same are not under the NDPS Act. He fairly admitted that except the disclosure statement, there is no incriminating evidence against the present petitioner to connect him with the alleged offence.

6. Heard.

7. Keeping in view the facts of the present case and the contentions of learned counsel for the parties, the petitioner has been arraigned as an accused on the basis of disclosure statement of the co-accused; except the disclosure statement, there is no evidence in the form of MANI KUMAR

CDR (Call Details Record) or trail of money transaction(s), to show the complicity of the present petitioner in the present case; the alleged contraband recovered from the co-accused falls under the category of intermediate quantity which is marginally above the small quantity, hence, the petitioner is directed to join the investigation as and when required by Investigating Officer. In the event of his arrest, the petitioner shall be admitted to interim bail on furnishing of bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of investigating/arresting Officer subject to the conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of the BNSS (erstwhile Section 438(2)Cr.P.C.), till the next date of hearing.

7. Adjourned to 14.07.2026.”

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance of the aforesaid order, the petitioner has duly joined investigation.

4. Learned counsel representing the State of Punjab, on instructions from SI Kuldeep Chand, No.758/GRP, Police Station Raja Sansi, Amrtisar (Rural), who is present in the Court, submits that in compliance of the order dated 12.05.2026, the petitioner has duly joined investigation and his custodial interrogation is not required.

5. In view of the fact that petitioner has duly joined investigation and keeping in view the statement given by learned counsel representing the State of Punjab, the present petition is allowed. The order dated 12.05.2026 passed by this Court is made absolute, subject to compliance of the provisions as envisaged under Section 482(2) BNSS.

(VIKRAM AGGARWAL)

JUDGE July 21, 2026 Mani Kumar

Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No

Whether reportable:

Yes/No MANI KUMAR