Sandeep Singh Alias Manni v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: July 8th, 2025 Sandeep Singh @ Manni .....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab .....Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present:

Mr. Kanwaljeet Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Amit Rana, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL) This is a second petition, which has been filed by the petitioner seeking the concession of regular bail after the previous one was dismissed as withdrawn on 23.10.2024, in FIR No.97 dated 06.04.2023 under Sections 22 and 29 of The NDPS Act registered at Police Station Special Task Force (Phase 4), District STF Wing/S.A.S. Nagar, 2.

On a pointed query put to the learned counsel as to what is the material change in circumstances that would warrant acceptance of the instant petition, he submits that the trial has still not concluded and, therefore, the petitioner be extended the concession of bail; the trial has been delayed on account of the persistent absence of the prosecution witnesses, who in the present case are all police officials. 3.

Learned State counsel while opposing the prayer and submissions made by the counsel opposite has although not disputed

-2the custody period of the petitioner, however, it has been asserted, on instructions from DSP Kirpal Singh, that a specific secret information was received qua the involvement of the petitioner in drug trafficking leading to a huge recovery of 1780 tablets of Alprazolam, which is much beyond the minimum classified as commercial under the NDPS Act, since the weight of the recovered contraband was 391 grams. Learned State counsel has further submitted that the trial would not take much time to conclude as six out of the 16 prosecution witnesses have been given up, three witnesses have been fully examined and the examination-in-chief of one of the remaining witnesses has already been done, which leaves just seven more witnesses to be examined. It has also been asserted by the learned State counsel, on instructions, that since it is a matter of record that the petitioner is involved in two more pending cases under the NDPS Act, the instant petition be dismissed as the petitioner is likely to misuse the concession of bail or even abscond at this stage of trial.

4.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant material on record.

5.

The alleged recovery effected from the petitioner pursuant to a secret information and after compliance of the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act is 391 grams of Alprazolam as against the minimum weight of 250 grams classified as commercial under the NDPS Act. Next date before the trial Court is stated to be 24.07.2025 when some of the remaining witnesses are likely to be examined. This Court, in the aforementioned facts and circumstances and keeping in view the criminal antecedents of the petitioner, does not deem it fit to extend the concession of bail to the petitioner at this stage.

-36.

The instant petition stands dismissed.

7.

However, it is made clear that anything observed hereinabove shall not be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

8.

At this stage, a request has been made by learned counsel for the petitioner to direct the trial Court to expedite the trial in view of the long incarceration of the petitioner.

9.

The trial Court is directed to make earnest efforts to conclude the trial at the earliest preferably within the next three months. 10.

It goes without saying that both the prosecution as well as the defence shall cooperate in the expeditious conclusion of the trial and would not take any unnecessary adjournments. July 8th, 2025 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Puneet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes Whether reportable :

No