Allowed

Dilbagh Singh Alias Bagho v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC11 Sept 2026CRM-M/46398/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted regular bail to the petitioner charged under NDPS and related Acts. Acknowledging the petitioner had already served over four years in custody while co-accused were on bail and noting the trial's likely delay, the Court deemed further detention pointless.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail subject to furnishing surety bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned Magistrate.

Dilbagh Singh Alias Bagho Vs State of Punjab — Narcotics (NDPS) | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

¶1

CRM-M-46398-2026

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

205

¶5

CRM-M-46398-2026 Decided on : 11.09.2026

¶6

DILBAGH SINGH ALIAS BAGHO

......Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB

......Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

¶12

Present: Mr. Vijay Dahiya, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶13

Mr. Adeshwar Singh Pannu, AAG, Punjab.

¶14

¶15

SANJAY VASHISTH, J.

¶16

The instant petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C.), for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, during the pendency of trial, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder:-

¶17

Name of Petitioner(s)	FIR No.	Date	Section(s)	Police Station	District
Dilbagh Singh @ Bagho	92	16.05.2022	21, 23, 29, 59, 61 & 85 of the NDPS Act; Sections 13, 16, 18 & 20 of Unlawful Activity Prevention Act; Section 7, 13(1)(A)(2) PC Act & Section 25 of Arms Act	STF	SAS Nagar (Mohali)

¶18

LAVISHA 2026.09.11 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh

¶19

CRM-M-46398-2026

¶20

¶21

On the basis of information given by the some special informant, FIR was registered and contents mentioned therein, are reproduced here under:-

¶22

“Lakhbir Singh @ Lakha resident of ChakMishri Khan and Sarabjit Singh @ Satnam @ Sabba resident of village DhanoeKhurd and some of their accomplices are in contact with Pakistani smugglers through WhatsApp. That all of them bring huge consignments of drugs. weapons and explosives through drain route. They can carry out any unfortunate incidence in India. That this information is true and credible and the offence is covered under section 21-23 NDPS Act, 25-54-59 Arms Act, 4-5 Explosive/substances/Act. I. Si prepared a typed computerised note and for registration of FIR a photo copy of the same was sent to the Police station through at Police email WhatsApp ps.stf [email protected] An FIR ID be registered and a photo copy of the same be sent to me SI through WhatsApp at my mobile phone No. 84472-76769 and email ID [email protected]. Special reports be prepared and be forwarded to Area Magistrate, Police Control Room and senior Police officers.”

¶23

Case of the prosecution is that one secret information was

¶24

received by the police with regard to accused Lakhbir Singh @ Lakha and Sarabjit Singh @ Satnam Singh @ Sabha. Upon his arrest, accused Sarabjit Singh @ Satnam Singh @ Sabha allegedly disclosed that he had started indulging in the business of smuggling narcotic substances as well as explosive substances in connivance with Pakistan-based smugglers, namely Manjit and Miya, with the assistance of his co-accused Sawinder Singh @ Bhola, Dilbagh Singh @ Bagho (present petitioner) and Harpreet Singh @ Happy. It was further disclosed that the accused were

¶25

LAVISHA 2026.09.11 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh

¶26

CRM-M-46398-2026

¶27

¶28

facilitating such activities by installing internet applications and configuring international mobile numbers on their mobile phones.

¶29

Pursuant to the aforesaid disclosure statement, other accused, namely Sawinder Singh @ Bhola, Harpreet Singh @ Happy and Dilbagh Singh @ Bagho (present petitioner), were nominated as accused in the present case on 17.05.2022 and were thereafter arrested.

¶30

During the course of investigation, accused Sawinder Singh @ Bhola was interrogated and, on the basis of the information allegedly disclosed by him, 500 grams of heroin was recovered from his possession. Thereafter, during further investigation, another quantity of 500 grams of heroin, along with one black-coloured Nokia mobile phone, containing two Pakistani SIM cards bearing Nos. 781263-708429 and 89920414056084 of Jazz company, was recovered from the residential house of the present petitioner.

¶31

After arrest of the petitioner, on the basis of his disclosure statement, his involvement in other cases relating to the bomb blast at the Court Complex, Ludhiana, was also brought to light. It is alleged that the said act was committed by the petitioner along with Surmukh Singh @ Sammu and that the tiffin bomb used in the said incident had been brought by Surmukh Singh @ Sammu. Consequently, petitioner was also arrested in the said cases.

¶32

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there are total ten accused in the present case and several co-accused have already been

¶33

LAVISHA 2026.09.11 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh

¶34

CRM-M-46398-2026

¶35

¶36

granted the concession of bail. The details of the co-accused who have been granted the concession of bail are as under:-

¶37

Sr. No.	Name of co-accused, who granted bail	Date of order granting bail	Petition number
1.	Harpreet Singh @ Happy	23.09.2025	CRM-M-16331-2025
2.	Sawinder Singh @ Bhola	09.09.2025	CRM-M-33905-2025
3.	SI Narinder Singh	25.09.2025	CRM-M-48802-2025
4.	Guravtar Singh alias Sonu	26.09.2025	CRM-M-53372-2025
5.	Lakhbir Singh @ Lakha	30.09.2025	CRM-M-53503-2025
6.	Avtar Singh @ Avtar Singh Maratta	15.10.2025	CRM-M-55005-2025
7.	Gurbir Singh @ Gura	13.11.2025	CRM-M-19874-2025
8.	Balwinder Singh	26.02.2026	CRM-M-63797-2025
9.	Surmukh Singh alias Sammu	26.02.2026	CRM-M-63935-2025

¶38

It is, therefore, contended that petitioner is the only accused who continues to remain in custody in the present case since 17.05.2022, and has thus undergone incarceration for a period of about 4 years, 3 months and 13 days. Learned counsel submits that, in view of the prolonged incarceration of the petitioner and the fact that similarly placed co-accused have already been enlarged on bail, petitioner is also entitled to the concession of regular bail. Learned counsel, accordingly, prays for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in the present case.

¶39

In response to the arguments addressed by learned counsel for the petitioner, learned State counsel, produces the custody certificate dated 10.09.2026 in Court today, which is taken on record. Office to tag the same at appropriate place. A copy thereof has been handed over to the counsel for the petitioner.

¶40

LAVISHA 2026.09.11 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh

¶41

CRM-M-46398-2026

¶42

¶43

As per the custody certificate, in the present case, petitioner has already undergone 04 years 03 months and 13 days period inside jail.

¶44

Learned State counsel, while opposing the prayer and submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that, as per the status report dated 07.09.2026 filed on behalf of the State, apart from the present case, petitioner is involved in two other criminal cases, i.e.-

¶45

(i) FIR No. 1 dated 13.01.2022, registered under Sections 302, 307, 124-A and 120-B of the IPC, Sections 13, 15, 16 and 18 of the UAPA and Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, at NIA, Delhi; and

¶46

(ii) FIR No. 314 dated 10.12.2023, registered under Sections 21-C, 25 and 29 of the NDPS Act and Sections 307 and 427 of the IPC, at Police Station STF, SAS Nagar (Mohali).

¶47

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, in FIR No. 314 dated 10.12.2023, petitioner already stands acquitted, vide judgment dated 08.11.2023.

¶48

This Court has heard the submissions addressed by learned counsel for the parties and has also gone through the record available before it.

¶49

Undoubtedly, petitioner is involved in two other criminal cases apart from the present case; however, he already stands acquitted in one of the said cases. Thus, as on date, there is no other criminal case under the NDPS Act pending against the petitioner.

¶50

LAVISHA 2026.09.11 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh

¶51

CRM-M-46398-2026

¶52

¶53

In the present case, petitioner has also undergone a substantial period of incarceration of about 4 years and 3 months. Furthermore, out of total 43 prosecution witnesses, only 27 witnesses have been examined so far. Thus, conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time.

¶54

Keeping in view the prolonged incarceration already undergone by the petitioner and stage of the trial, this Court is of the considered view that further incarceration of the petitioner for an indefinite period would serve no useful purpose, particularly when the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude.

¶55

In view of the totality of circumstances, facts and allegations levelled against the petitioner, period of incarceration already undergone by him, and the factors noticed here above, this Court deems it appropriate to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner in the present case.

¶56

Consequently, prayer made in the present petition is allowed . Petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, subject to his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/ Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Illaqa Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case.

¶57

Needless to observe that the petitioner shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witness in any manner directly or indirectly.

¶58

LAVISHA 2026.09.11 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh

¶59

CRM-M-46398-2026

¶60

¶61

Any of the discussion done and recorded here above, shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the facts of the case. Therefore, trial Court is expected to decide the case by taking an independent view, on the basis of evidence available on record, as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law.

¶62

It is further made clear that if, in future, petitioner is directly found indulged in similar kind of activities, this order shall be deemed to be cancelled.

¶63

17. Petition stands disposed of.

¶64

(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE

¶65

11.09.2026 Lavisha

¶66

Whether Speaking/Reasoned:  YES/ NO Whether Reportable:  YES/ NO

¶67

LAVISHA 2026.09.11 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh

Dilbagh Singh Alias Bagho v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dilbagh Singh Alias Bagho 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