Allowed

Ranjit Singh @Rana v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC10 Sept 2026CRM-M/13126/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail petition under Section 483 BNSS regarding NDPS charges where heroin was recovered from a co-accused, the Court noted clean antecedents, completed investigation, and long custody. It held no useful purpose is served by continued detention and allowed regular bail.

What did the court decide?

Release on regular bail by furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, CJM, or DM.

Ranjit Singh @Rana Vs State of Punjab — Narcotics (NDPS) | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

217

¶3

CRM-M-13126-2026 Date of Decision:10.09.2026

¶4

RANJIT SINGH @RANA

...Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL

¶10

¶11

Present: Mr. Ashish Aggarwal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Rahul Jindal, AAG, Punjab.

¶12

VIKRAM AGGARWAL, J. (ORAL)

¶13

The prayer in the present petition preferred under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘the BNSS’) is for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.85, dated 03.04.2025, registered at Police Station ANTF Wing, District ANTF (STF), S.A.S Nagar, under Sections 21-C, 25 and 29 of NDPS Act, 1985.

¶14

On 03.04.2025, upon a secret information having been received, two persons, namely Ranjit Singh @ Rana (petitioner) and Harpreet Singh @ Happy were apprehended. Upon their search, 960 grams of heroin is alleged to have been recovered from the pocket of Harpreet Singh. The petitioner is also stated to have suffered a disclosure statement that he was involved in the purchase of heroin.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and that the recovery of the contraband was made from the personal search of co-accused Harpreet Singh, who is in

¶16

NISHA 2026.09.11 11.01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶17

CRM-M-13126-2026 -2-

¶18

custody. He submits that the petitioner is in custody for the last 1 year, 5 months and 2 days, he having been arrested on 03.04.2025. Learned counsel further submits that the antecedents of the petitioner are clean; investigation stands completed; final report was submitted on 24.09.2025; charges were framed on 03.04.2026; and out of 17 witnesses only 2 witnesses have been examined. He submits that under the circumstances, the trial will take a sufficiently long time; therefore, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody any longer.

¶19

Per contra , learned State counsel has opposed the bail application, stating that the allegations against the petitioner are very serious and that, if the petitioner is released on bail, he may try to influence and threaten the witnesses and may also abscond.

¶20

I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties.

¶21

Concededly, the contraband is alleged to have been recovered from the pocket of Harpreet Singh, though both were travelling together on a motorcycle. As to whether the petitioner can be said to be in conscious possession of the same, will be a debtable issue. The petitioner is in custody for the last 1 year, 5 months and 8 days. The antecedents of the petitioner are clean. Investigation has been completed. Final Report has been submitted. Charges were framed on 03.04.2026. However, out of 17 witnesses, only 2 witnesses have been examined. It is, therefore, clear that the trial will take a sufficiently long time and in the considered opinion of this Court, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody any longer.

¶22

In view of the aforementioned facts and circumstances, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his

¶23

NISHA 2026.09.11 11.01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶24

CRM-M-13126-2026 -3-

¶25

furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate.

¶26

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

¶27

		(VIKR
Septe	mber 10, 2026
Nisha-1
	Whether speaking/reasoned	Yes/No
	Whether reportable	Yes/No

¶28

NISHA 2026.09.11 11.01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Ranjit Singh @Rana v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjit Singh @Rana v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases