Allowed

Satnam Singh @ Sagar v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC10 Jul 2026CRM-M/7468/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail sought under Section 483 BNSS in an NDPS and Arms Act FIR alleging recovery of 1 kg heroin and a pistol from the petitioner. With prolonged custody, slow trial pace and co-accused already released on bail by a coordinate Bench, bail was granted without expressing any opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on regular bail on furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/CJM/Duty Magistrate.

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

¶1

105+205

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

CRM-27136-2026 in/and CRM-M No.7468 of 2026 Date of Decision:-10.07.2026

Satnam Singh @ Sagar

…..Petitioner.

Versus

State of Punjab

.....Respondent.

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL

¶10

*********

¶11

Present:Mr. Jashandeep Singh Sandhu, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr. Rahul Jindal, AAG, Punjab.

¶13

VIKRAM AGGARWAL, J . (ORAL)

¶14

CRM-27136-2026

¶15

Documents Annexures P-3 and P-4 are taken on record subject to all just exceptions.

¶16

CRM stands disposed of.

¶17

CRM-M-7468-2026

¶18

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.52 dated 28.03.2024 registered under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘the NDPS Act’) and Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959, at Police Station STF, District SAS Nagar,

¶19

YAG DUTT 2026.07.10 17:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

¶20

CRM-M No.7468 of 2026 -2-

¶21

Mohali.

¶22

Custody certificate filed by learned State counsel in Court today, is also taken on record.

¶23

The case of the prosecution is that on 29.03.2024, on the basis of a secret information, petitioner (Satnam Singh @ Sagar) and co-accused Jaswant Singh were apprehended and during their search, one polythene bag containing 1 Kg. of heroin and one .32 bore pistol with 2 live cartridges was recovered.

¶24

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated. He further submits that the petitioner is in custody since 29.03.2024; final report stands submitted; charges have been framed and out of 23 prosecution witnesses, only 6 witnesses have been examined so far. He further submits that co-accused Jaswant Singh, who was also apprehended along with the petitioner, has been granted regular bail by a coordinate Bench vide order dated 15.05.2026 passed in CRMM-11878 of 2026 ; trial will still take a sufficiently long time and no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody any longer.

¶25

Per contra , learned State counsel has opposed the bail application stating that a commercial quantity of heroin and one .32 bore pistol with 2 live cartridges was recovered from the petitioner. He submits that under the circumstances, there would be no occasion to release the petitioner on bail.

¶26

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

¶27

Concededly, the petitioner is in custody since 29.03.2024.

¶28

YAG DUTT 2026.07.10 17:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

¶29

CRM-M No.7468 of 2026 -3-

¶30

Final report stands submitted and after framing of charges, out of 23 prosecution witnesses, only 6 witnesses have been examined till date. Co-accused Jaswant Singh, who was also apprehended at the spot along with the petitioner, has already been granted regular bail by a coordinate Bench vide order dated 15.05.2026 passed in CRM-M-11878 of 2026 . Thus, trial will still take a sufficiently long time. This Court is, therefore, of the considered opinion that it is a fit case for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner.

¶31

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

¶32

(VIKRAM AGGARWAL) July 10, 2026 JUDGE Yag Dutt Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No

¶33

YAG DUTT 2026.07.10 17:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

Satnam Singh @ Sagar v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satnam Singh @ Sagar 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jagmeet Kaur Vs State of Punjab and Another

Raman Kumar and Others Vs State of Haryana and Another

Harmanpreet Singh @ Bittu @ Harmandeep Singh Vs State of Punjab

Jaswant Singh Alias Jass and Another Vs State of Haryana

Rakesh Kumar Vs State of Punjab

Babaljeet Singh Dhaliwal and Others Vs State of Punjab and Another