IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

231 CRM-M-17986-2026 (O&M) Date of decision : 09.04.2026 Simranjit Singh @ Nikka Bath ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present:- Mr. H. S. Batth, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Vivek Sharma, AAG, Punjab.

MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral)

1. The instant one is the second petition that has been filed by the petitioner under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to him in case bearing FIR No. 47 dated 17.04.2024, registered under Sections 21, 27-A and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’) and Section 201 of IPC at Police Station Sujanpur, District Pathankot. His previous petition was dismissed as withdrawn on 11.12.2025.

2. Brief facts of the case relevant for the disposal of the present petition are that on 17.04.2024, the petitioner and co-accused Gurjant Singh @ Ravi, while coming in an Innova car bearing registration number PB-09-V- 2824 from the side of Jammu & Kashmir, were arrested by a police party and recovery of 15 grams of heroin and drug money of Rs. 5 Lakhs was effected from them. On search of the vehicle, recovery of 8.304 kgs. of heroin was effected from the same. During the course of investigation, both of them made disclosure statements that the aforesaid car was handed over to them by the co- accused Jagjit Singh on the asking of one Harpal Singh @ Bittu Bhalwan. It was also disclosed that the hidden compartment in the fuel tank of the vehicle was also made by co-accused Jagjit Singh and they used to hand over the heroin to him brought by them from Srinagar. On the basis of these disclosure statements, co-accused Jagjit Singh and Harpal Singh @ Bittu Bhalwan and along with several other persons were nominated as accused in this case. During further investigation, drug money of Rs. 8 Lakhs was recovered from co-accused Swaran Singh, Tousief Hussain and Ishfaq Mughal. After completion of necessary investigation and usual formalities, challan was presented in the Court and presently, the petitioner along with the co-accused is facing trial for commission of aforementioned offences.

3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case and a false recovery has been planted upon him and co-accused. He has been in custody for a period of 01 year, 11 months and 18 days. There is prolonged pendency of the trial in the present case, and there is no likelihood of its conclusion in the near future, particularly as only 03 out of total 24 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far. Trial has also not progressed since the date of dismissal of his previous petition. The extended period of his incarceration is a sufficient and new ground to seek concession of bail to him. He is not involved in any similar case. His continued detention would not serve any useful purpose. With these broad submissions, it is urged that the petition deserves to be allowed.

4. Notice of motion.

5. Learned State counsel, who has advance notice of the petition and is ready to argue the matter, has filed the custody certificate of the petitioner. He has argued that taking into consideration the gravity of the allegations levelled against the petitioner, his criminal antecedents as well as the fact that commercial quantity of the contraband was recovered in this case, which attracts rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, he does not deserve to be released on bail. Moreso, the instant petition, being a successive one, is not maintainable. The trial may be expedited. There are chances of the petitioner’s absconding or committing similar offences, if released on bail. Therefore, it is stressed that the petition does not deserve to be allowed.

6. This Court has heard learned counsel for the parties at considerable length.

7. The petitioner is alleged to be found in conscious possession of commercial qua