Second regular bail petition in an NDPS commercial-quantity case. Court held no substantial change in circumstances since dismissal of the earlier petition: trial progressing with witnesses examined or given up, no undue delay. Petition dismissed; observations not to affect trial merits.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
-1-
CRM-M-13587-2026 (O&M)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
212 CRM-M-13587-2026 (O&M) Date of decision:02.07.2026
Maan Singh
... Petitioner
Vs.
State of Punjab
... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA
Present: Mr. Gourave Bhayyia Gilhotra, Advocate and Mr. Vishawjeet Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab.
Manisha Batra, J. (Oral).
“The petitioner along with the co-accused was found in the conscious possession of commercial quantity of contraband. He is claimed to be a taxi driver and the plea that has been
HARJEET KAUR 2026.07.03 12:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CRM-M-13587-2026 (O&M)
-2-
taken by him that his vehicle was hired by the co-accused and contraband was in their conscious possession without knowledge of the petitioner has to be proved only on the basis of thorough assessment of the evidence to be produced during trial and not at this stage. Prima facie, the complicity of the petitioner in the crime stands established. The well settled proposition of law is that while deciding a bail petition, the nature of accusations, severity of punishment, if the accusations entail a conviction and nature of evidence in support of accusations are to be seen. Frivolity of prosecution should always be considered. In view of the foregoing legal principles and having regard to the petitioner’s role in the incident, the nature of recovery effected from him and the attendant facts and circumstances coupled with the fact that the rigors of Section 37 are attracted in this case, this Court finds no compelling ground to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.”
been falsely implicated in this case. He is in custody for a period of over 01 year and 01 month. After dismissal of his previous petition, there has not been much progress in the trial as only 01 out of 21 prosecution witnesses has been examined so far. The trial will take considerable time to conclude. Each day spent by him in custody furnishes a new ground to him for seeking benefit of bail. He was only a driver of the taxi engaged by the co-accused. Recovery was effected from the conscious possession of the co-accused and not from him. His vehicle was hired by the co-accused for the purpose of going to Sri Muktsar Sahib. It is, therefore, argued that he deserves to be released on bail.
HARJEET KAUR 2026.07.03 12:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CRM-M-13587-2026 (O&M)
-3-
serious in nature. His previous petition has been dismissed by passing a detailed order. There is no substantial change in the circumstances. 01 out of 21 prosecution witness has since been examined and 09 have been given up. The trial in going at a proper pace and there is nothing on record to show that there has been any undue delay in conclusion of the same. It is further argued that this petition being the successive one is not even maintainable and deserves to be dismissed.
HARJEET KAUR 2026.07.03 12:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
-4-
CRM-M-13587-2026 (O&M)
shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case and shall not influence the outcome of the trial.
(MANISHA BATRA) 02.07.2026 JUDGE
harjeet Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No
HARJEET KAUR 2026.07.03 12:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the successive regular bail petition showed a substantial change in circumstances warranting bail despite Section 37 NDPS rigors.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Maan Singh
State of Punjab
Manisha Batra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
