IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

241 *****

CRM-M No.67777 of 2025 Date of decision : 12.1.2026 Date of uploading : 13.1.2026 Jugraj Singh @ Jaggu ………….Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …….Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. Atinderpal Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. Hemant Aggarwal, AAG, Punjab ---

SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL)

1. Present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.104 dated 22.7.2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 21, 27(a), 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as ‘NDPS Act’) at Police Station Chattiwind, District Amritsar Rural.

2. The gravamen of the FIR in question is that the petitioner is an accused of being involved in an FIR pertaining to NDPS Act, involving 55 grams of Heroin and Rs.1320/- as drug money allegedly found in the possession of co-accused, namely Harpreet Singh @ Happy, and the petitioner has been nominated, in this case, on the disclosure of said co-

accused.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is in custody since 22.7.2025. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act have not been complied with, and thus, the prosecution case suffers from inherent defects. Learned counsel has further iterated that sole basis to array the petitioner as an accused is the disclosure statement of co-accused, namely Harpreet Singh @ Happy. Learned counsel has also argued that the co- accused of the petitioner, namely, Harpreet Singh @ Happy, has already been granted the concession of regular bail by this Court vide order dated 25.9.2025 passed in CRM-M No.53331 of 2025. Learned counsel has further iterated that the petitioner has suffered incarceration for more than

5 months. Thus, regular bail is prayed for.

4. Learned State counsel has opposed the present petition by arguing that the allegations raised against the petitioner are serious in nature and, thus, he does not deserve the concession of the regular bail. Learned State counsel seeks to place on record custody certificate dated

11.1.2026 in Court, which is taken on record.

5. I have heard counsel for the rival parties and have gone through the available records of the case.

6. The petitioner was arrested on 22.7.2025 and is in continuous custody since then; culmination of the investigation as also the trial emanating therefrom, if occasion so arises, will take time. The petitioner has been implicated as an accused in the FIR in question solely on the basis of disclosure statement of co-accused-Harpreet Singh @ Happy, from whom 55 grams of heroin was allegedly recovered. It is not in dispute that said co-accused, namely, Harpreet Singh @ Happy has already been granted concession of regular bail by this Court vide order dated 25.9.2025 passed in CRM-M No.53331 of 2025. As per the prosecution version, there is no other material available to connect the petitioner with the contraband except for the said disclosure statement. It is pertinent to note that such disclosure statements, in the absence of corroborative evidence hold limited evidentiary value and cannot be sole basis for implicating the petitioner. The reliance on this unsubstantiated statement raises serious doubts about the fairness and objectivity of the investigation. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was not present at the spot. The veracity and weightage required to be attached to the disclosure statement made by the co-accused will be fully tested at the time of trial. The rival contentions raised at Bar give rise to debatable issues, which shall be ratiocinated upon during the course of trial. This Court does not deem it appropriate to delve deep into these rival contentions, at this stage, lest it may prejudice the trial. Nothing tan