IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 27.03.2026 Goldy @ Goldy Kumar …Petitioner.

v.

State of Punjab …Respondent.

CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE AARADHNA SAWHNEY.

Present: Mr. Munish Puri, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Gautam Thapar, Senior DAG, Punjab.

****

AARADHNA SAWHNEY, J. (Oral)

1. This is 2^nd petition for grant of bail filed by petitioner u/s 483 of BNSS, an accused in case FIR No. 0119 dated 27.09.2025, registered against him under Section 61 of Excise Act, at Police Station Taragarh, District Pathankot. The earlier petition seeking similar relief, filed by petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn from this Court on 16.1.2026.

2. Relevant facts necessary for disposal of the petition are being taken from para 5(E) of the status report dated 09.03.2026 filed by way of affidavit of Sukhjinder Pal Singh, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police (Rural), District Pathankot. The same are noticed hereinbelow:- “5 (E). That on 27.09.2025, the police party headed by ASI Satpal and other police officials in connection with patrolling and search of bad elements were going towards the Taragarh, Baknor, Rakwal, Gajju Jagir, Narayanpur which police party reached at village Gajju Jagir, a secret information was received, on the basis of which police checked at Narayanpur road near Kathlor Road, a person was seen sitting with plastic container, on seeing the police party he became perplexed and tried to get away, who was caught by the police officials and on asking he disclosed his name as Golda, on checking, 40 bottles of illicit liquor (39 bottles of 750 ML and 1 bottle 570 ML) were recovered from petitioner-accused Goldy.

Recovery effected: That 35 bottles of illicit liquor (34 bottles of 750 ML and 1 bottle 570 ML) (total 26250 ML) have been recovered from petitioner-accused Goldy.”

Petitioner moved an application for grant of bail before learned Sessions Judge, Pathankot. The same was dismissed vide order dated 21.11.2025. Aggrieved of which, the present petition has been filed for grant of bail.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that petitioner, an active local politician has been falsely implicated in the present case only on account of upcoming Zila Parishad elections. No such incident, as alleged in the FIR, ever occurred. Nothing was recovered from the possession of the petitioner. False recovery of liquor was planted upon him only with a view to drag him in the present case. Further, on a bare perusal of the FIR, no offence under Section 123 of BNS is made out, for petitioner did not administer nor intended to administer any poison/harmful substance/intoxicating drug to any person nor the police authorities received any complaint to this effect. Thus, it is apparent that the said Section has been added only to make the incident more serious/grave/heinous. It is further the submission of learned counsel that since the withdrawal of the Ist petition, challan accompanied by the report of Chemical Examiner stands filed, as per which liquor was not spurious (hooch). This being the ‘Changed Circumstance” necessitating filing of 2^nd petition seeking relief of bail.

The next leg of submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that in the wake of challan having been filed recently on 6.2.2026, the likelihood of completion of trial in the near future is quite remote. Thus, when viewed in the factual scenario of the case, further incarceration of petitioner, who has been in custody since 27.9.2025, would not serve any useful purpose. Prayer for allowing the petition has been made.

4. Per contra, while controverting the request for grant of bail, learned State counsel submits that 35 bottles of liquor (34 bottles of 750 ML and 1 bottle 570 ML) (total 26250 ML) were recovered from a plastic container being carried by the petitioner. There is nothing on record to suggest that police officials had any prior enmity and, thus, falsely implicated present petitioner. That apart, past antecedents of petitione