IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 17.10.2025 Surmukh Singh @ Samu ... Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY *****

Present : Mr. Hitesh Chopra, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Jasjit Singh, DAG, Punjab.

*****

AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (Oral)

1. The present petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.28 dated 21.02.2021, registered under Sections 21/29-61-85 of NDPS Act and Sections 25-54-59 of Arms Act, at Police Station STF SAS Nagar, District Mohali.

2. Learned counsel contends that the petitioner has been in custody for last 2 years and more than 6 months. He alleges false implication. His name surfaced based on the disclosure statement of co-accused Harpreet Singh @ Happy, who is in custody. The alleged recovery of 4 kg. 210 grams is stated to have been recovered from the open field and thus cannot be said to be from his conscious possession. The FIR was registered against unknown persons. Supplementary challan has been presented on 03.12.2024 and only one, out of 18 prosecution witnesses, has been examined.

3. The custody certificate dated 16.10.2025, filed by the learned State counsel is taken on record. As per the same, the petitioner is behind bars for 2 years, 6 months & 8 days.

4. Learned State counsel opposes the bail on the ground that the petitioner has been specifically named in the disclosure statement of co-accused. However, he is unable to controvert the submissions with regard to stage of the case.

5. Heard.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in particular that the petitioner is in custody for the last 2 years, 6 months and 8 days; supplementary challan has been presented on 03.12.2024 and out of 18 PWs, only one has been examined so far, the trial is likely to take a considerable time, further incarceration of the petitioner would be violative of his right enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the present petition is allowed.

7. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail, subject to furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case and shall abide by the following conditions:-

(i) The petitioner will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

(ii) The petitioner will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

(iii) The petitioner will appear before the trial Court on each and every date fixed, unless is exempted by a specific order of Court.

(iv) The petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which, he is an accused, or for commission of which he is suspected of.

(v) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly coerce, induce, threaten or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/ her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence in any manner.

(vi) The petitioner shall not in any manner misuse his liberty. (vii) The petitioner shall furnish his address and mobile number by way of an affidavit to the trial Court and not change the same till conclusion of trial and if for any reasons, he seeks to change either of the aforesaid, it shall be done only with prior information to the learned trial Court.

(viii) The petitioner shall not leave the country without prior permission of the trial Court.

(ix) The trial Court/Duty Magistrate may impose any other condition, as deemed appropriate while releasing the petitioner.

8. It is made abundantly clear that in case there is any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the State shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail as granted to the petitioner by this order.

9. In view of the above, it is clarified that the observations made herein above are limited for the purpose of present proceedings and would not be construed as any opinion on the merits of the case and the trial would proceed independently