CRM-M/36280/2026 of MURTI SINGH ALIAS MURTA SINGH ALIAS MURTI Vs STATE OF PUNJAB on 13 July 2026

1. The present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (erstwhile Section 439 Cr.P.C.) seeking regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.126 dated 26.09.2024, under Sections 21(C), 29, 61 and 85 of NDPS Act, 1985 and Sections 10, 11 and 12 of Aircraft Act, registered at Police Station Khalra, District Tarn Taran.

2. The case of the prosecution is that a secret information was received by the Station House Officer, Police Station Khalra, that some object had fallen into the fields of Bagicha Singh through drones coming from Pakistan, and four persons were searching for the same. The police officials reached the spot, and upon seeing the police party, the four persons tried to fled, abandoning a yellow-coloured packet from which 501 grams of heroin was recovered. The petitioner and one Salwinder Singh were apprehended at the spot and on the basis of their disclosure statements, co-accused Kuldeep

Chandigarh

Singh and Sarwan Singh were arrested and 256 grams of heroin was recovered from them.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and nothing has been recovered from his conscious possession. Although, the petitioner was stated to be present in the fields but he was not searching for the contraband. She also submits that there is no incriminating evidence against the petitioner which would connect him with the alleged contraband. She also submits that the petitioner is in custody for the last more than 01 year, 08 months and 16 days. Although the petitioner is involved in three other cases but he is on bail in that cases. Moreover, co-accused Salwinder Singh has already been granted bail by this Court in CRM-M-9921-2026 on 25.02.2026 (Annexure P-3). She, therefore, prays for release of the petitioner on regular bail as the trial is likely to take a long time because none of the prosecution witness has been examined so far.

4. Notice of motion.

5. On the asking of the Court, Mr. Sandeep Kumar, DAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent and vehemently opposes the prayer for grant of regular bail to the petitioner. He has filed the custody certificate of the petitioner in Court, which is taken on record. As per the custody certificate, the petitioner is in custody for the last more than 01 year, 08 months and 16 days. He, upon instructions, submits that none of the prosecution witness has been examined so far.

6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

Chandigarh

7. In view of the above submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the facts that the petitioner is in custody for the last more than 01 year, 08 months and 16 days, co-accused has already been granted bail and that the trial is likely to take a long time to conclude as none of the prosecution witness has been examined so far, therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner during the pendency of the trial as the continuous detention of the petitioner would not serve the ends of justice.

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 bonds, surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned.

9. However, it is made clear that in case the petitioner misuses the concession of bail, the State/complainant would be at liberty to seek cancellation of his bail.

(H.S.GREWAL) July 13, 2026

JUDGE Sonia

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No

Whether reportable

: Yes/No

Chandigarh