IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 25.03.2026 Date of uploading: 25.03.2026 Satnam Singh @ Satta ....Petitioner V/s State of Punjab ....Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. Manu Loona, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Hemant Aggarwal, DAG, Punjab (Through V.C.).

*****

SUMEET GOEL, J. (Oral)

1. Present petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking grant of anticipatory/pre-arrest bail under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘BNSS’) in FIR No.17 dated 30.01.2026 registered for offences punishable under Sections 21, 29/61/85 of the NDPS Act at Police Station Koom Kalan, District Ludhiana. 2. The gravamen of the FIR in question is that the petitioner is an accused of being involved in FIR pertaining to NDPS Act involving recovery of 273 grams of heroin, 61 grams of ‘Ice’ (methamphetamine) alongwith Rs.60,000/- which were allegedly recovered from the co-accused of the petitioner namely Tanveer Singh @ Dhanna. The petitioner’s name has come in the disclosure statement of the said co-accused, wherein he has stated that the petitioner was used to purchase the heroin from him for selling it further.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR. Learned counsel has further iterated that no recovery whatsoever has been effected from the conscious possession of the petitioner and that he was not present at the spot at the time of the alleged recovery. The petitioner has been nominated in the disclosure statement of the co-accused. Learned counsel has emphasized that there are material contradictions and improvements in the prosecution version & nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation and shall fully cooperate with the investigating agency in case enlarged on pre- arrest bail. On the strength of these submissions, the grant of anticipatory bail is prayed for.

4. Per contra, learned State counsel while raising arguments in tandem with the reply 14.03.2026 has vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner by submitting that the allegations against the petitioner are grave and serious in nature. Relevant paragraph of the said reply reads thus:

“32. That it is respectfully submitted that the role of the petitioner, evidence against the petitioner, criminal antecedents of the petitioner, status of trial as well as necessity of custodial interrogation are given below:

(A) Role of the petitioner:

Petitioner has clearly surfaced during investigation as an active associate in the illegal drug trafficking network being operated by co-accused Taranvir Singh Dhanna. During investigation it has come on record that co-accused Taranvir Singh @ Dhanna was engaged in the sale of heroin and ICE and used different persons, bank accounts and financial transactions for receiving and transferring drug proceeds. The statement of witness Gurpreet Singh recorded during investigation further reveals that when he demanded return of the money earlier lent to co-accused Taranvir Singh @ Dhanna, an amount of Rs.5,000/- dated 19.01.2026 vide Transaction ID No. 601919151080 and -22- Rs.10,000/- dated 27.01.2026 vide Transaction ID No. 639332853838 were transferred into his Capital Finance Small Bank account from Axis Bank Account No. 921010053130524 belonging to the present petitioner. The said transactions clearly indicate the petitioner's financial link with co-accused Taranvir Singh @ Dhanna and show that the petitioner was facilitating monetary transactions connected with the activities of the drug network. Thus, the petitioner has emerged as a conspirator who was actively associated with the co-accused and was involved in handling financial transactions arising out of the illegal trade of narcotic substances.

(B) Evidence against the petitioner:

i)