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

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Regular bail during pendency of trial: petitioner ordered released upon furnishing requisite bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned/Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, subject to seven enumerated conditions, viz.: (1) no inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts to dissuade disclosure before the Court or investigating agency; (2) no tampering with prosecution evidence and no influencing, intimidating or contacting prosecution witnesses; (3) no departure from the territorial limits of India without prior permission of the learned Trial Court and furnishing of passport particulars, if any, to the Investigating Officer and Trial Court; (4) furnishing of permanent residential and present correspondence addresses with documentary proof, verification of their correctness by the Investigating Officer within 48 hours of acceptance of bonds with a verification report on record, false/fictitious/incorrect addresses being grounds for seeking cancellation of bail; (5) furnishing of PAN, Aadhaar Number, particulars of all operative bank accounts and a declaration of details of immovable properties, if any, concealment or false information being valid ground for cancellation of bail; (6) written intimation to the Investigating Officer and Trial Court of any change of residential address or mobile number within seven days of such change; (7) commission of no similar offence during the pendency of the trial, presence before the Trial Court on each and every fixed date unless appearance exempted in accordance with law, no absence without prior permission, violation being open to cancellation of regular bail and coercive process including warrants of arrest.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 during the pendency of trial arising from FIR No. 206 (Section 21 NDPS Act, 1985), in which 400 grams of heroin constituting a commercial quantity was allegedly recovered from a vehicle admittedly owned by co-accused Jarnail Singh @ Jaila, given the petitioner's judicial custody of over eight months, concluded investigation, presented challan, and a trial unlikely to conclude in the near future, notwithstanding the State's invocation of the rigours of Section 37 NDPS Act.

Court's answer

Where the alleged contraband was recovered from a vehicle admittedly owned by co-accused Jarnail Singh @ Jaila, the prosecution is required, at this stage, to establish during the course of trial the petitioner's conscious possession of the contraband.

Ratio / Principle

In the totality of the facts and circumstances - judicial custody of more than eight months, investigation concluded, challan already presented, and a trial not likely to conclude in the near future - continued incarceration of the petitioner pending trial would serve no useful purpose.

Key takeaways

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 subject to furnishing requisite bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned/Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate and subject to the enumerated conditions.ratio¶40

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

BAIL (REGULAR) - NDPS - S.483 BNSS, 2023 (erstwhile S.439 CrPC, 1973). First regular-bail petition in FIR No. 206 dt. 09.10.2025, PS Kot Ise Khan, Distt. Moga (S.21 NDPS): petitioner Gurbhinder Singh alias Bhinda apprehended 09.10.2025 together with co-accused Jarnail Singh @ Jaila and Akashdeep Singh @ Aakash in car PB-05-AG-1922 (admittedly owned by co-accused Jarnail Singh @ Jaila), from whose dashboard a packet of 400 grams heroin - a commercial quantity engaging the S.37 NDPS rigours urged by the State - was allegedly recovered. Held (oral judgment, Virinder Aggarwal, J., 08.07.2026): the prosecution is required to establish, during trial, the petitioner's conscious possession of contraband recovered from a vehicle admittedly owned by a co-accused; with judicial custody exceeding eight months, investigation concluded, challan presented, and trial not likely to conclude in the near future, continued incarceration pending trial would serve no useful purpose. Petition ALLOWED without expressing any opinion on the merits; release subject to bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the CJM/Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate and seven conditions (no inducement/tampering/witness contact; no exit from India without Trial Court permission plus disclosure of passport particulars; Investigating Officer verification of residential and correspondence addresses within 48 hours; PAN/Aadhaar/bank-account/immovable-property declaration; seven-day intimation of change of address or mobile number; attendance on all trial dates; no similar offence). Precedents invoked by petitioner's counsel and recounted by the Court (not expressly adopted): Sewak Singh v. State of Haryana, 2010 (6) RCR (Criminal) 1824; Raj Kaur v. State of Punjab, 2025 (4) Law Herald (P&H) 3186; Gurmel Singh @ Gurmail Singh @ Ghela v. State of Punjab, CRM-M-73859-2025 (decided 27.01.2026). Ancillary application CRM-13172-2026 allowed; pending miscellaneous applications disposed.

CRM-M-7754-2026 (O&M)

-:1:-

... Respondent

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

( 207 ) CRM-M-7754-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision: 08.07.2026

GURBHINDER SINGH ALIAS BHINDA

… Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB

-.-

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL

Present:Mr. Balbir Singh Saini, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Navreet Kaur, AAG, Punjab.

-.-

VIRINDER AGGARWAL, J . (Oral)

CRM-13172-2026

Keeping in view the averments made in the application and for the reasons stated therein, the same is allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

Main Case

The present is the first petition instituted by the petitioner under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to the erstwhile Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973), seeking the concession of regular bail during the pendency of trial in FIR No. 206 dated 09.10.2025, registered under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, at Police Station Kot Ise Khan, District Moga ( Annexure P-1 ).

GAURAV SOROT 2026.07.09 09:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-7754-2026 (O&M)

-:2:-

Succinctly stated, the prosecution case is that on 09.10.2025, the petitioner, namely Gurbhinder Singh @ Bhinda, along with co-accused Jarnail Singh @ Jaila and Akashdeep Singh @ Aakash, was apprehended by the investigating agency, and a recovery of 400 grams of heroin was allegedly effected from a car bearing registration No. PB-05-AG-1922, which was stated to be in their possession.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is entitled to the concession of regular bail, as he has remained in judicial custody for nearly nine months. It is submitted that no recovery has been effected from the conscious possession of the petitioner and that the alleged contraband was recovered from the vehicle owned by co-accused Jarnail Singh @ Jaila. It is further argued that the challan has already been presented and, therefore, no further custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required. Learned counsel submits that the trial has not progressed in any meaningful manner and is likely to consume considerable time before its conclusion. Consequently, no useful purpose would be served by continued incarceration of the petitioner during the pendency of the trial.

Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the present petition and submits that the petitioner does not deserve the concession of regular bail, as he was apprehended along with co-accused Jarnail Singh @ Jaila and Akashdeep Singh @ Aakash while travelling in the vehicle from which 400 grams of heroin, constituting a commercial quantity, was allegedly recovered. It is contended that the rigours of Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 are fully attracted and that the trial is still at its nascent stage.

GAURAV SOROT 2026.07.09 09:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-7754-2026 (O&M)

-:3:-

The custody certificate tendered by learned State counsel is taken on record, subject to all just exceptions.

6.1. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have carefully perused the paper book with their able assistance.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the judgment of this Court in Sewak Singh v. State of Haryana, 2010 (6) RCR (Criminal) 1824 , wherein, despite the recovery of four bags of poppy husk from a car, the Coordinate Bench held that the mere presence of the petitioner in the vehicle was insufficient to infer conscious possession or control over the contraband and, accordingly, set aside his conviction.

7.1. Reliance has also been placed upon Raj Kaur v. State of Punjab, 2025 (4) Law Herald (P&H) 3186 , wherein it was held that, even where recovery was effected from a residential house, the prosecution was under an obligation to establish the conscious possession of the accused, particularly when the premises were jointly occupied.

7.2. Learned counsel has further relied upon the decision in Gurmel Singh @ Gurmail Singh @ Ghela v. State of Punjab, CRM-M-

73859-2025, decided on 27.01.2026 , wherein this Court observed that, in the absence of specific allegations connecting each accused with the recovery allegedly effected from a ‘ Dewan bed ’ in the house, the requirement of conscious possession could not be presumed.

In the present case, the FIR was registered on the basis of prior secret information. The petitioner, along with the co-accused, was apprehended while travelling in car bearing registration No. PB-05-AG-

GAURAV SOROT 2026.07.09 09:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-7754-2026 (O&M)

-:4:-

1922, and a packet allegedly containing 400 grams of heroin was recovered from the dashboard of the said vehicle. Admittedly, the vehicle is owned by co-accused Jarnail Singh @ Jaila. At this stage, the prosecution is required to establish, during the course of trial, the conscious possession of the petitioner in respect of the contraband allegedly recovered from the vehicle. The petitioner has remained in judicial custody for more than eight months, the investigation stands concluded, and the challan has already been presented. The trial is not likely to conclude in the near future. In the totality of the facts and circumstances, continued incarceration of the petitioner pending trial would serve no useful purpose.

8.1. Consequently, 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, subject to his furnishing requisite bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned/Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, as the case may be, and subject further to the following conditions:-

The applicant-petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts before the Court or to the investigating agency.

The applicant-petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever, nor shall he attempt, directly or indirectly, to influence, intimidate, or contact any prosecution witness.

GAURAV SOROT 2026.07.09 09:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-7754-2026 (O&M)

-:5:-

The applicant-petitioner shall not leave the territorial limits of India without obtaining the prior permission of the learned Trial Court. In the event he is in possession of a passport, he shall furnish its particulars before the Investigating Officer as well as the learned Trial Court.

The learned Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, before accepting the bail and surety bonds, shall obtain from the applicant-petitioner her permanent residential address as well as his present correspondence address, duly supported by appropriate documentary proof. The Investigating Officer shall verify the correctness of the said addresses within 48 hours from the acceptance of the bail bonds and shall place a verification report on the record. In the event either of the addresses is found to be false, fictitious, or incorrect, it shall be open to the prosecution to seek cancellation of the concession of bail in accordance with law.

The applicant-petitioner shall furnish before the learned Trial Court, either at the time of furnishing the bail bonds or within such period as may be specified by the Court, his Permanent Account Number (PAN), Aadhaar Number, particulars of all operative bank accounts, and a declaration disclosing details of his immovable properties, if any. Any concealment of material particulars or furnishing of false information shall constitute a valid ground for seeking cancellation of bail in accordance with law.

The applicant-petitioner shall intimate the Investigating Officer as well as the learned Trial Court, in writing, of any change in her residential address or mobile number within seven days from the date of such change.

The applicant-petitioner shall not commit any offence of a similar nature during the pendency of the trial and shall remain present

GAURAV SOROT 2026.07.09 09:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-7754-2026 (O&M)

-:6:-

before the learned Trial Court on each and every date fixed, unless her personal appearance is exempted in accordance with law. He shall not absent himself from the proceedings without obtaining prior permission of the learned Trial Court. In the event of any violation of the aforesaid conditions or her unauthorized absence from the trial proceedings, it shall be open to the learned Trial Court to proceed in accordance with law, including cancellation of the concession of regular bail and issuance of appropriate coercive process, including warrants of arrest.

In view of the fact that the principal matter stands finally adjudicated, all pending miscellaneous applications, if any, arising out of or ancillary to the present proceedings, shall also stand disposed of accordingly. No separate or further orders are required to be passed in respect thereof.

( VIRINDER AGGARWAL) 08.07.2026 JUDGE Gaurav Sorot Whether reasoned / speaking? Yes / No Whether reportable? Yes / No

GAURAV SOROT 2026.07.09 09:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document