IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

238 *****

CRM-M No.15437 of 2026 Date of decision : 7.4.2026 Date of uploading : 7.4.2026 Raja Robin Singh ………….Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …….Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. Vinod K. Kaushal, Advocate and Ms. Saroj Kumari, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. Gaurav Gurcharan S. Rai, Senior DAG, Punjab ---

SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL)

1. Present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.405 dated 10.12.2025, under Sections 25(8) of Arms Act, 1959 and Section 61(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Sections 54 and 59 of Arms Act and Sections 21/61/85 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 added later on), registered at Police Station Gharinda, 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 305 grams of heroin allegedly found in the possession of co-accused, namely Akashdeep and the petitioner has been nominated, in this case, on the disclosure of said co-accused Akashdeep Singh.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the petitioner is in custody since 17.12.2025. 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 Akashdeep Singh. Learned counsel has further iterated that the petitioner has suffered incarceration for more than 3 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

6.4.2026 in the 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 17.12.2025. The matter is still under investigation and challan is yet to be filed. Culmination of investigation as also the trial, in case occasion so arises, will take long. The petitioner has been implicated as an accused in the FIR in question solely on the basis of disclosure statement of co-accused- Akashdeep Singh, from whom 245 grams of heroin was allegedly recovered (60 grams of heroin was alleged recovered from the present petitioner). 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 tangible has been brought forward to indicate the likelihood of the petitioner absconding from the process of justice or interfering with the prosecution evidence.

6.1. At this juncture, it would be apposite to refer to a judgment passed by this Court in Anshul Sardana versus State of Punjab, passed in CRM-