Disposed¶19

Amrik Singh v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC11 Nov 2025CRM-M/26751/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: regular bail; Section 483 BNSS 2023; Section 439 CrPC; Section 22 NDPS Act 1985; Lomotil tablets; Diphenoxylate Hydrochloride; FIR No. 188 dated 05.12.2023; GRP Ludhiana; speedy/expeditious conclusion of trial; incarceration over 1 year 10 months; bail deferred at fag end of trial; Punjab and Haryana High Court; Justice Sanjay Vashisth; Amrik Singh v. State of Punjab.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for regular bail not adjudicated at this stage; petition disposed of without observations on merits, with a direction to the learned trial Court to conclude and decide the trial expeditiously. ¶19

Amrik Singh Vs State of Punjab — Narcotics (NDPS) | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Prayer for regular bail not adjudicated at this stage; petition disposed of without observations on merits, with a direction to the learned trial Court to conclude and decide the trial expeditiously.

¶19

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, booked in FIR No. 188 dated 05.12.2023 under Section 22 of NDPS Act, 1985 (P.S. GRP, Ludhiana), should be granted regular bail during the pendency of trial. +1 more

¶14

Court's answer

In view of the stage of the trial (all prosecution witnesses already examined and trial likely to be decided finally in the near future), the Court refrained from dealing with the prayer for regular bail at this stage.

¶18

Ratio / Principle

The present petition stands disposed of without making any observations on merits.

¶19

Key takeaways

Noticing that the petitioner has already undergone incarceration for more than 01 year and 10 months (arrested on 05.12.2023), the learned trial Court is directed to make all endeavours to conclude and decide the trial expeditiously.ratio¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

CRM-M-26751-2025 (Decided 11.11.2025, High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh; Sanjay Vashisth, J., Oral) - Regular bail petition under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C.) by Amrik Singh, accused in FIR No. 188 dated 05.12.2023, Section 22 of NDPS Act, 1985, Police Station Govt. Railway Police (GRP), Ludhiana, involving recovery of 10800 tablets of Lomotil containing salt Diphenoxylate Hydrochloride. With the State reporting that all prosecution witnesses stand examined and the trial is likely to be decided finally in the near future, the Court refrained from dealing with the prayer for bail at that stage and disposed of the petition without making observations on merits. Noticing that the petitioner had already undergone incarceration of more than 01 year and 10 months (arrested on 05.12.2023), the learned trial Court was directed to make all endeavours to conclude and decide the trial expeditiously.

¶1

CRM-M-26751-2025

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

215

¶5

CRM-M-26751-2025 Decided on : 11.11.2025

¶6

Amrik Singh . . . Petitioner(s)

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Punjab . . . Respondent(s)

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

¶10

PRESENT: None for the petitioner(s).

¶11

Mr. Vinay Malhotra, DAG, Punjab.

¶12

¶13

SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral)

¶14

The instant petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C.), for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, during the pendency of trial, who has been booked in a criminal case arising

¶15

out of First Information Report, as detailed here-under:-

¶16

Name of Petitioner(s) Amrik Singh	FIR No. 188	Date 05.12.2023	Section(s) 22 of NDPS Act, 1985	Police Station Govt. Railway Police (GRP)	District Ludhiana

¶17

There is recovery of 10800 tablets of Lomotil containing salt Diphenoxylate Hydrochloride, from the possession of petitioner – Amrik Singh, learned State counsel informs that all the prosecution witnesses have already been examined and trial is likely to be decided finally in the near future.

¶18

In view of the stage of the trial, as informed by the learned State counsel, I refrain from dealing with the prayer for bail at this stage.

¶19

Accordingly, the present petition stands disposed of without

¶20

JAWALA RAM 2025.11.12 19:35 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶21

CRM-M-26751-2025 - 2 -

¶22

making any observations on merits.

¶23

However, noticing that the petitioner has already undergone incarceration for a period of more than 01 year and 10 months (arrested on 05.12.2023), learned trial Court is directed to make all endeavours to conclude & decide the trial expeditiously.

¶24

(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE

¶25

November 11, 2025 J.Ram Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No

¶26

JAWALA RAM 2025.11.12 19:35 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

Amrik Singh v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amrik Singh v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Varun Vs State of Punjab and Others

Annu (Minor) Vs State of Haryana and Others

Jaswinder Saroay Vs Manish Saroay

Sukhveer Singh Vs State of Punjab

Robin @ Ruby @ Rubin Kumar Vs State of Haryana

Harpreet Singh Vs State of Punjab and Another