IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision :11.02.2026 Jaskaran Singh ......Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA PARTAP SINGH Present : Ms. Srishti S. Sharma, Advocate for Mr. K.P.S.Dhaliwal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Eklavya Darshi, DAG, Punjab.

SURYA PARTAP SINGH , J . (Oral) :

1. The petitioner, who is facing trial for the commission of offence punishable under Sections 21, 25 and 29 of Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, vide FIR 37 dated 02.07.2024, lodged in Police Station SSOC District Amritsar, is in custody.

2. This petition for interim bail has been filed by the petitioner on the ground that marriage of his sister is scheduled to take place tomorrow, i.e. on

12.02.2026.

3. Notice of motion.

4. Since advance notice has already been served, Mr. Eklavya Darshi, DAG, Punjab, appears on behalf of respondent-State. Hence, service of notice upon the State is hereby dispensed with.

5. The learned State Counsel has filed custody certificate of the petitioner. The same be taken on record.

6. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that for the purpose of interim bail the petitioner had approached the learned trial Court, and that the learned trial Court by virtue of order dated 09.02.2026 instead of affording the benefit of interim bail to the petitioner permitted the petitioner to participate in the marriage of his sister in custody. It has been further contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that even the period for which the petitioner has been permitted to attend the marriage is three hours i.e. 10.30 A.M to 1.30 P.M. While claiming that the petitioner is already in custody for a period of more than 1 year and 7 months, and that he has clean antecedents, it has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that to attend the marriage of his sister interim bail at least for a period of three day’s be afforded to the petitioner.

7. The learned State counsel has controverted the above mentioned arguments. According to learned State counsel once interim bail is being sought to attend the marriage of his sister and permission to attend the marriage in police custody only has been given by the learned trial Court, the present petition seeking for interim bail is not maintainable.

8. The record has been perused carefully.

9. If the facts and circumstances of the present case are analyzed, it transpires that:-

i) that the petitioner is already in custody for a period of more than

1 year and 7 months;

ii) that the petitioner has clean antecedents;

iii) that the reasons for seeking interim bail is sufficient.

10. Taking into consideration the above mentioned facts, it is hereby held that the petitioner is entitled for interim bail, and that it shall be appropriate that to attend the marriage of his sister the petitioner is released on interim bail for a period of three days i.e. from 12.02.2026 till 14.02.2026.

11.. Accordingly, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, the present petition is hereby allowed and the petitioner is admitted to interim bail for a period of three days, i.e. from 12.02.2026 till 14.02.2026, subject to furnishing of bail bonds to the satisfaction of learned trial Court. The petitioner shall surrender before the jail authority on 14.02.2026 by 5.00 P.M.

(SURYA PARTAP SINGH)

JUDGE

11.02.2026

Manoj Bhutani