Sukhdev Singh Vs State of Punjab

This petition has been filed b y the petitioner under Section 4 8 3 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 202 3 seeking regular bail in case be a ring FIR No. 9 8 dated 24.06.2024, registered under Sections 21-C and 29 o f the Narcotic D rugs and Psychotropic Subst a nces Act, 1985 (for short ‘N D PS Act’) at P o lice Station Special Task Force, District STF Wing SAS Nagar. 2. Brief facts of the case releva n t for the purpose of disposal o f this petition a re that on 24.06.2024, on t h e basis of a secret informa t co-accuse d Rohit Salhotra was apprehen d ed by a police party headed b y SI Kashmir S ingh and recovery of 400 gram s of heroin was recovered from h im. He was formally arrested at the spot. Upon interrogation, he disclosed th a t he had purch a sed the recovered contraband from the present petitioner. O n the basis of t h e same, the petitioner was nom i nated in this case as an accused and was arrested on 24.06.2024. After compl e tion of necessary investigation and usual for m alities, challan was presente d in the Court and presently, the

¶13

MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.04.29 10:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶14

CRM-M-2907-2025 (O&M) -2-

¶15

petitioner along with the co-accused is facing trial for commissio n of aforement i oned offence. He had moved a n application before the trial C ourt for grant o f regular bail but the same h a d been dismissed, vide order d ated 02.12.202 4 .

¶16

Learned counsel for the peti t ioner has argued that the petiti o ner has been f alsely implicated in this case. T he petitioner was not found a t the spot and has been involved in this case on the basis of the disclosure state m ent made by c o-accused Rohit Salhotra, whi c h is not admissible in evidence. To fortify thi s argument, learned counsel fo r the petitioner has relied upo n the authority o f Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in Tofan Singh vs. State of Tamil Nadu : (2021) 4 SCC 1 . The co-accused was a drug addict an d the petitioner had previously seen him while consuming heroin. He had wa r ned him to re p ort the matter to the police. D u e to the said reason, the co-acc u sed has falsel y implicated him in this case. The petitioner is not involved in any other case and has clean antecedents. It is further argued that investigatio n has since bee n completed and challan has be e n filed. The petitioner is in cus t ody since 24. 0 6.2024. The trial is likely to t a ke a long time. No useful pur p ose would be served by keeping him in cust o dy anymore. It is, therefore, u r ged that the petition deserves to be allowe d and the petitioner deserves t o be released o n bail.

¶17

Status report has been fil e d by the respondent-State. I t is submitted therein and learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab has ar g ued that thoug h the petitioner has been nomi n ated in this case on the basis o f the disclosure statement suffered by above named co-accused but during the

¶18

MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.04.29 10:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶19

CRM-M-2907-2025 (O&M)

¶20

-3-

¶21

course of investigation, the complicity o f the petitioner in the subject c r ime has been d uly established. The petitione r had exchanged 21 calls wit h co-accuse d , which shows that he was in v olved in the subject crime. Tri a l is going on at proper pace. It is, thus, arg u ed that the petition is liable t o be dismissed.

¶22

I have heard learned counsel f or the parties at considerable le n gth and have a lso perused the material placed o n record.

¶23

The petitioner has been nomi n ated in this case on the basis o f the disclosure made by co-accused Rohit Salhotra, who was arrested at the spot on 24.06. 2 024 and from whose custody, r e covery of 400 grams of heroin was effected. T he allegation against the pet i tioner is that he had supplied the recovered contraband to the co-accused. H owever, no subsequent recove r y is shown to h ave been effected from the peti t ioner. A perusal of the status r e port reveals that he is not involved in any other case and has clean cri m inal anteceden t s. Mere call details, without t he transcript of the conversa t ions exchange d between the co-accused a n d the petitioner, would not be considere d to be corroborative material in absence of substantive mat e rial found ag a inst the petitioner. Investigati o n has since been concluded and challan h a s been presented. The trial is li k ely to take time. The petitioner is in custody s i nce 24.06.2024. Keeping in vi e w the aforesaid facts, I am o f the considere d opinion that no useful purpose would be served by keeping hi m in custody a n ymore. Accordingly, the prese n t petition is allowed. The petiti o ner is ordere d to be released on regula r bail, subject to his furnis h ing personal/s u rety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magis t rate

¶24

MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.04.29 10:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶25

CRM-M-2907-2025 (O&M) -4-

¶26

concerned. However, it will be open for the prosecution to apply for cancellati o n of bail in case the petitioner is found involved in any o ther subseque n t case.

¶27

It is made clear that any observation made herein above is o nly for the p u rpose of deciding the present p etition and the same shall hav e no bearing o n the merits of the case.

¶28

28.04.2025 (MANISHA BATRA) Waseem Ansari JUDGE

¶29

Whe t her speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whe t her reportable Yes/No

¶30

MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.04.29 10:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Sukhdev Singh v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sukhdev 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mukesh Vs State of Haryana

Shubham Alias Sudha Vs State of Haryana and Another

Harjeet Singh Alias Harjeet Singh Saini Vs State of Punjab

Ravinder Singh @ Raja Vs State of Punjab

Shabir Ahmad War Vs State of Punjab and Others

Aniket Kumar Alias Anikit Kumar Alias Rajat Vs State of Punjab