Allowed¶20

Sukhwinder Singh Alias Baghi v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC18 Dec 2025CRM-M/51499/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail granted; NDPS Act 1985 S.21, S.27(a), S.29; BNSS 2023 S.483 regular bail; non-commercial quantity heroin 7 grams; Rs.600 recovered; chance recovery 5 grams co-accused Jeevan Singh @ Jeeva; disclosure statement; custody since 12.07.2025; investigation pending final report not filed; FIR No.34 dated 07.07.2025 PS Mattewal District Amritsar Rural; Punjab & Haryana High Court Chandigarh; Vinod S. Bhardwaj J.; CRM-M-51499-2025(O&M); decided 18.12.2025 oral; condition not to influence prosecution witnesses; observations not on merits.

What did the court decide?

Regular bail granted; petitioner to be released on furnishing requisite bail bond/surety bond to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned, subject to the condition of not threatening or influencing prosecution witnesses. ¶20

Sukhwinder Singh Alias Baghi Vs State of Punjab — Narcotics (NDPS) | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶20

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, in custody since 12.07.2025 in FIR No.34/2025 (PS Mattewal, Amritsar Rural; Ss. 21/27(a)/29 NDPS Act) with 7 grams of heroin and Rs.600/- recovered on the co-accused's disclosure, investigation pending and final report not yet filed, is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 BNSS, 2023. +1 more

¶9

Court's answer

Taking into consideration the stage of the trial, the actual period of custody already undergone, and that the recovery is of non-commercial quantity, the petition for regular bail is allowed; the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on furnishing requisite bail bond/surety bond to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.

¶20

Ratio / Principle

The recovery of 7 grams of heroin from the petitioner falls within the category of non-commercial quantity.

¶19

Key takeaways

As a condition of release, the petitioner shall not extend any threat to, and shall not influence, prosecution witnesses in any manner directly or indirectly.ratio¶21
The observations made in the order are not an expression on the merits of the case; the Trial Court shall decide the case on the basis of available material.obiter¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab & Haryana High Court (Vinod S. Bhardwaj, J., oral), 18.12.2025 — Regular bail granted under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 in CRM-M-51499-2025(O&M): petitioner arrested in FIR No.34/07.07.2025, PS Mattewal, Amritsar Rural, under Ss. 21/27(a)/29 NDPS Act (27(a) & 29 added later); chance recovery of 5 g heroin from co-accused Jeevan Singh @ Jeeva, whose disclosure led to recovery of 7 g heroin and Rs.600/- from the petitioner; custody since 12.07.2025; investigation pending, final report not filed; short reply of DSP dated 03.12.2025 undisputed. Court noted the 7 g recovery falls within non-commercial quantity and, considering stage of trial and custody undergone, allowed bail subject to no threatening/influencing of prosecution witnesses; observations expressly not on merits.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

206

¶3

CRM-M-51499-2025(O&M) Date of decision: 18.12.2025 Sukhwinder Si n gh @ Baghi ...Petitioner

¶4

VERSUS

¶5

State of Punjab ...Respondent

¶6

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ Present :- No n e.

¶7

¶8

VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral)

¶9

Th e instant first petition has been fi led under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in c a se bearing FIR No.34 dated 0 7.07.2025 registered under Sections 21 (Section 27(a) & 29 added later o n ) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic S u bstances Act, 1985 at Polic e Station Mattewal, District Amritsar Rural.

¶10

La w yers are abstaining from work o n account of a call from the High Court Bar Association.

¶11

As per the petition, the FIR in ques t ion came to be registered on the basis of a c h ance recovery of 5 grams of h e roin from co-accused Jeevan Singh @ Jeeva. During the course of investig a tion, the said co-accused, in his disclosure s t atement, nominated the present petitioner, pursuant to which recovery of 7 g rams of heroin along with a s u m of Rs.600/– was effected from the petitio n er.

¶12

It i s averred that the recovery in question fall under noncommercial qu a ntity and that the petitioner is i n custody since 12.07.2025. The investigati o n in the case is still pending a nd final report is yet to be filed.

¶13

SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2025.12.18 17:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶14

¶15

CRM-M-51499-2025(O&M)

¶16

206

¶17

The averments contained in the present petition stand verified from the short reply dated 03.12.2025, filed by way of an affidavit of Dharminder Kalyan, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub-Division Majitha, Amritsar (Rural) (Additional Charge). The aforesaid factual position, therefore, remains undisputed.

¶18

I have perused the aforesaid short reply and have gone through the petition as well as documents appended alongwith it.

¶19

Taking into consideration the stage of the trial, the actual period of custody already undergone by the petitioner, and noticing that the recovery of 7 grams of heroin from the petitioner falls within the category of non-commercial quantity, I deem it appropriate to allow the present petition.

¶20

The instant petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bail bond/surety bond to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned.

¶21

It is made clear that the petitioner shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witnesses in any manner directly or indirectly.

¶22

The observation made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case and the Trial Court shall decide the case on the basis of available material.

¶23

Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

¶24

18.12.2025 (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) Sumit Gusain JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

¶25

SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2025.12.18 17:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Sukhwinder Singh Alias Baghi v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sukhwinder Singh Alias Baghi 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

Rohit and Another Vs State of Haryana

Shiv Narin Bhado Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

M/S Shiva Rice Traders Vs Pb. St. Coop. Sup. Mkt. Fed. Ltd.

Jaswinder Singh Alias Jassa Vs State of Punjab

Satpal Singh Vs State of Punjab

Jhabar and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Anr.