236 Date of Decision: 11.02.2026 Satnam Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE AARADHNA SAWHNEY Present: Mr. Raj Kumar Gupta, Advocate and Mr. Rajiv Rathore, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Gurdeep Singh, AAG, Punjab.

***

AARADHNA SAWHNEY, J. (ORAL)

1. Petitioner, co-accused in case FIR No.34 dated 11.06.2019 registered against him, for commission of offences punishable u/s 15/25/29 of the NDPS Act, at Police Station Ghagga, District Patiala, has prayed for grant of bail.

2. Relevant facts as emerging from documents on record be noticed hereinbelow:-

“On 11.06.2019, based on chance recovery, police officials of police station Ghagga, District Patiala, seized 70 Kg. ‘Poppy husk’ (marginally more than commercial quantity) from the truck bearing registration No.PB-10-CU-9755, which was found parked on the right side of the Main Road, Ghagga towards Patra, ahead of Gurudwara Gian Sagar. Two persons namely Sucha Singh and Ramesh Kumar @ Pappu were found sitting beside the truck. They could not render any explanation for keeping such a heavy quantity of poppy-husk in the truck. After completing the requisite statutory formalities both the above mentioned persons were arrested and during interrogation name of the petitioner, who is registered owner of the truck cropped up.

Petitioner was arrested on 27.03.2025 and has been in custody since then.

3. Petitioner-accused moved an application for grant of bail before the Ld. Judge, Special Court, Patiala. The same was dismissed vide order dated

08.05.2025. Aggrieved of which, present petition has been filed.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case only on the basis of the disclosure statement of co-accused Satnam Singh and Ramesh Kumar. He was not present at the site. He was not aware that his vehicle would be misused by two accused for transporting the contraband. The said disclosure statement in the absence of any recovery is not admissible evidence. It is further the submission of learned counsel that co-accused Sucha Singh and Ramesh Kumar @ Pappu, who were arrested at the site have since been granted concession of bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 19.01.2022 and 19.04.2022 passed in CRM-M-7360-2021 and CRM-M-14682-2022, respectively, thus similar treatment be meted out to present petitioner.

The next leg of submission raised by learned counsel for the petitioner is that investigations are complete, for challan has been filed but out of 17 cited prosecution witnesses only 05 have been examined so far, thus, possibility of completion of trial in the near future is quite remote. It is further the contention of learned counsel that petitioner is involved in another case of like nature but that by itself cannot be a ground to deny the concession of bail particularly when the petitioner was not arrested at the site. In the light of submissions advanced hereinabove, learned counsel prays that petitioner, who has been in custody since 27.03.2025, deserves a lenient view to be taken in his favour by extending him the concession of bail, for his further incarceration would not serve any useful purpose. Prayer for allowing the petition has been made.

5. Per contra, learned State counsel while referring to the status report dated 29.09.2025 filed by way of affidavit of Mr. Inderpal Chohan, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub Division Patran, Distt. Patiala has opposed the request for grant of bail on the ground that petitioner is the main kingpin of the entire incident. Co-accused Sucha Singh and Ramesh Kumar @ Pappu, who were arrested the site, were working on the instructions of the present petitioner, who is registered owner of the truck, which was apprehended and a huge quantity of contraband was recovered. Thus, plea taken by the petitioner that he was unaware, is nothing but a last minute effort on his part to wriggle out of embarrassing position in which