Kulwinder Singh @ Babbu Vs State of Punjab

The present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973), seeking the concession of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No. 0155 dated 24.08.2025, registered under Sections 22, 25, 27 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, at Police Station Sardulgarh, District Mansa.

¶13

As per the prosecution, the FIR was registered on the statement of a police official, who along with the police party was on patrolling duty for checking suspicious persons, places and vehicles. During patrolling, near Ghaggar Bridge, Sardulgarh, the police party noticed a person standing near a motorcycle and searching a plastic polythene kept on the seat of the motorcycle. On seeing the police party, the said person attempted to flee but was apprehended. On inquiry, he disclosed his identity. The police party allegedly tried to join independent witnesses, but no person agreed to associate with the proceedings. The plastic polythene lying on the motorcycle was

¶14

allegedly checked and two strips containing a total of 20 intoxicant tablets of KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.09 10:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶15

CRM-M-14412-2026

¶16

2

¶17

Etizolam Tablets I.P. 0.5 mg were recovered. The batch number, date of manufacturing and expiry date on the strips were allegedly erased. The recovered tablets were taken into possession after completing the necessary formalities, including preparation of a sealed parcel and sample seal. The motorcycle was also taken into possession. During investigation, the motorcycle was found to be registered in the name of the petitioner. Subsequently, on the basis of the material collected during investigation, the petitioner was nominated as an accused and Section 29 of the NDPS Act was added.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and there is no material available on record connecting him with the alleged offence. It is submitted that the alleged recovery was effected from the co-accused and no recovery whatsoever has been effected from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The petitioner has been nominated only on the basis of the alleged disclosure statement of the co-accused and the fact that the motorcycle allegedly used in the occurrence belongs to him.

¶19

3.1 Learned counsel further submits that mere ownership of the vehicle, without any material to establish conscious knowledge, active participation or meeting of minds, does not attract the provisions of Section 29 of the NDPS Act. It is contended that there is no independent or corroborative evidence against the petitioner and his implication is based only on suspicion. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 27.08.2025, the investigation stands concluded and the challan has already been presented. It is submitted that 18 witnesses have been cited by the prosecution, but no

¶20

KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.09 10:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶21

CRM-M-14412-2026

¶22

3

¶23

witness has been examined till date and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude.

¶24

Learned State counsel has placed on record the custody certificate dated 06.07.2026. A perusal of the same reveals that the petitioner is also facing proceedings under Section 174-A IPC in FIR No. 08/2024 registered at Police Station City-II, Mansa. The said proceedings appear to have emanated from the failure of the petitioner to appear before the Court despite issuance of proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C.

¶25

The aforesaid conduct of the petitioner assumes significance while considering the present petition for grant of regular bail, which is a discretionary relief. The initiation of proceedings under Section 174-A IPC indicates that at one point of time the petitioner had failed to submit himself before the jurisdiction of the Court and the process of law had to be invoked for securing his presence. Such conduct raises a legitimate apprehension regarding the petitioner's willingness to participate in the proceedings before the learned Trial Court and his availability to face the trial, in the event of being enlarged on bail.

¶26

This Court is conscious of the fact that the petitioner is an undertrial and the allegations against him are yet to be adjudicated during trial. However, while considering the prayer for bail, the overall conduct and antecedents of the accused are relevant factors. The fact that the petitioner has been proceeded against under Section 174-A IPC on account of nonappearance before the Court cannot be ignored at this stage.

¶27

In view of the aforesaid circumstances, particularly the conduct of the petitioner in avoiding the process of law and the apprehension of his non-

¶28

KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.09 10:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶29

CRM-M-14412-2026 4

¶30

availability during the course of trial, this Court is not inclined to exercise the discretion in favour of the petitioner for grant of regular bail at this stage. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed.

¶31

(VIRINDER AGGARWAL) JUDGE

¶32

08.07.2026 kv

¶33

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

¶34

KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.09 10:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

Kulwinder Singh @ Babbu v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kulwinder Singh @ Babbu v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Navdeep Singh Alias Navkaran Singh Alias Nav Vs State of Punjab

Nittin Vs State of Punjab & Another

Narinderpal Singh Vs State of Punjab

Bhadaur Singh @ Bahadar Singh Vs State of Punjab

Gurbhinder Singh Alias Bhinda Vs State of Punjab

Rajesh Kumar Alias Rajesh Kashyap Vs State of Haryana and Anr.