217 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 05.09.2025 Kamal Singh ..... Petitioner Versus State of Punjab .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ Present: Mr. Puneet Bali, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Ms. Simran Goria, AAG, Punjab.

Rajesh Bhardwaj, J. (ORAL)

1. Petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing the present petition praying for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.71 dated 26.06.2024 under Sections 18, 27, 27-A, 29, 61, 85 of NDPS, 1985, registered at Police Station Khuian Sarwar, District Fazilka.

2. Succinctly, facts of the case are that while patrolling the police party received a secret information on 26.06.2024 to the effect that Sukhyad Singh @ Yad, Tarsem Singh and Jugraj Singh are involved in smuggling the opium, which they would be bringing from Jharkhand in Swift Car bearing registration No.PB-05-AC-5015. It was informed that in case of raid, they could be arrested alongwith the contraband. On receiving the information, raiding team was constituted and the vehicle as disclosed in the secret information was stopped. All the three persons disclosed in the secret information, were arrested alongwith 66 kgs of opium and Rs.40,000/- as drug money. On the registration of the FIR, the investigation commenced. During the investigation, co-accused Sukhyad Singh @ Yad and Jugraj Singh made disclosure statements about the complicity of the petitioner and thus, he was also arrayed as an accused and thereafter, arrested on

05.07.2024. The petitioner approached the Court of learned Judge, Special Court, Fazilka praying for grant of regular bail. However, after hearing both the sides, the learned Court finding no merits in the same, dismissed the bail application filed by the petitioner vide order dated 12.11.2024. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner earlier approached this Court by way of filing CRM- M-95-2025, which was allowed to be dismissed as not pressed vide order dated 03.03.2025, CRM-M-28481-2025, which was dismissed on the ground of no change in circumstances, vide order dated 28.05.2025. Hence, the petitioner has again approached this Court praying for grant of regular bail by way of filing the present third petition.

3. It has been vehemently contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has submitted that neither the petitioner was named in the FIR, nor any recovery has been effected from him. However, he has been implicated in this case only on the basis of disclosure statement of co-accused Sukhyad Singh @ Yad and Jugraj Singh and thus, vide DDR No.33 dated 30.06.2024 the petitioner was arrayed as an accused. He submits that recovery of alleged contraband is weighing 66 kgs of opium with Rs.40,000/- as drug money, had been effected from the co-accused. He submits that the petitioner is a hotelier, who has been implicated in this case on the basis of CCTV footage of the hotel. He submits that the petitioner himself provided the CCTV footage of his hotel. On issuing notice by the Investigating Agency, he himself approached them. It is submitted that case of the prosecution is based on the secret information, but there is a blatant violation of mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act. The confessional statement of the co-accused in itself is not admissible evidence. To buttress his arguments, he has submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents as he has never been involved in any other case under IPC or under the NDPS Act, except the present case. He submits that investigation is complete, challan has been presented and charges have been framed, however, there is no progress in the trial as no witness has been examined till date, thus, right of the petitioner of speedy trial has been miserably defeated. He submits that the petitioner earlier approached this Court praying for grant of interim bail for a period of two weeks for attending marriage of his adopted daughte