243 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.43214 of 2025 Date of Decision: 14.10.2025 Gurpreet Singh .....Petitioner versus State of Punjab ..... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ *****

Present :- Mr. Rishu Mahajan, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Simran Goria, Asstt. A.G., Punjab.

*****

R AJESH BHARDWAJ , J. (Oral)

1. Present petition has been filed praying for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.39, dated 16.03.2024, under Sections 21(C), 25, 29 of NDPS Act, 1985, registered at Police Station Lopoke, District Amritsar.

2. Succinctly the facts of the case are that the police party, while on patrolling on 16.03.2024, received a secret information to the effect that Gurpreet Singh (petitioner) and Satnam Singh were involved in the drug trafficking. It was informed that both of them would come on their motorcycle and carrying a consignment of heroin for supplying to their customers and in case of barricading near the bridge at pond on the way to village Chhidan, they could be apprehended along with the contraband. On receiving the secret information, the raiding party was constituted and the barricading was laid at the place as disclosed in the secret information.

02 persons were seen coming on the motorcycle and thus, both were apprehended. On asking, driver of the motorcycle disclosed his name to be Satnam Singh, whereas the person sitting pillion disclosed his name to be Gurpreet Singh, i.e. the petitioner. They were suspected to be carrying some contraband and thus on giving the offer, their search was conducted. On conducting the search of Gurpreet Singh (petitioner), 600 grams of heroin was recovered from the polythene bag kept in the front pocket of the black hoodie worn by him whereas from the search of Satnam Singh, 800 grams of heroin was recovered from the polythene bag kept in the front pocket of the hoodie worn by him. They failed to produce any licence regarding the conscious possession of the same and thus, the FIR was registered and both were arrested on the spot. The samples taken were sent to the FSL. On receipt of the FSL, the challan was presented and on framing of charges, the trial commenced. The petitioner approached the Court of learned Judge, Special Court, Amritsar praying for the grant of bail, however, after hearing both the sides and finding no merit in the same, the learned Judge, Special Court, Amritsar declined the bail application filed by the petitioner vide order dated 11.11.2024. Hence being aggrieved, the petitioner is before this Court by way of filing the present petition praying for the grant of bail.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that the petitioner has been falsely and frivolously implicated in the present case. He has submitted that FIR has been registered on the basis of secret information but there is a violation of mandatory provisions of Section 42 of NDPS Act. He has submitted that the alleged recovery is also effected from the personal search of the petitioner, however there is a violation of mandatory provisions of Section 50 of NDPS Act as well. He has submitted that the alleged recovery has been effected from the public place, however no independent witness has been joined. To buttress his arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents as he has never been involved in any other case. He has submitted that the petitioner is behind bars for last more than 1½ years, however there is no progress in the trial till date and thus, the right of speedy trial of the petitioner has been miserably defeated. He has submitted that in the facts and circumstances, the petitioner deserves to be granted regular bail.

4. Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. She has submitted that both the accused were specifically named in the secret information. She has submitted that the re