Money Singh @ Mau v. State Of Punjab

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH 208/3

Date of Decision:- 21.03.2025 MONEY SINGH @ MAU ....Petitioner(s)

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB

...Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY Present :

Mr. Parveen Chauhan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ankit Grewal, DAG Punjab.

***** SANJIV BERRY, J. (ORAL) The instant petition has been preferred by the petitioner under Section 439 CrPC for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in the following case :- FIR No.

Dated Sections Police Station 11.01.2024 21(a), 27(A), 29 of the NDPS Act;

25 of the Arms Act, Dinanagar, District Gurdaspur no. 2), Mo 2.

It is, inter alia, contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He contends that the petitioner has no concern with the co-accused arrested in the FIR nor has he indulged in any illegal activities. He further contends that the petitioner has been nominated in the present case on the basis of disclosure statement of co-accused Rupinder Singh @ Pinder and Kanwaljit

-2Singh. He submits that the petitioner was arrested on 15.01.2024, and since then he is in custody. He further submits that the case of the petitioner is at par with co-accused Balraj Singh and Mehtab Singh, who have been granted the concession of bail by this Court vide order dated 10.02.2025, passed in CRMM131172024 and CRMM132052024, respectively. He submits that challan has been presented in the Court and the conclusion of trial will take sufficient long time. Thus prays for grant of concession of bail to the petitioner.

3.

Per contra, learned State counsel while referring to the short reply filed by the State has opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner alleging that although the petitioner was not named in the FIR, but has been nominated on the disclosure statement of Rupinder Singh @ Pinder and Kanwaljit Singh and recovery of one pistol has been effected from him. 4.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5.

After considering the rival contentions and perusing the record, it transpires that on 11.01.2024, the Police party apprehended the car driven by Rupinder Singh @ Pinder, wherein other co-accused namely Kanwaljit Singh and Pema Doma Bhutia were also sitting. On checking of the car, one gram 500 mg heroin along with Rs.15,000/- cash and two pistols 32 bore and two cartridges were recovered from the dashboard of the car. Subsequently on the basis of disclosure statement made by Kanwaljit Singh and Rupinder Singh, the petitioner was apprehended on 15.01.2024 and a recovery of one pistol has been effected from him. Admittedly, the case of the petitioner is at par with co-accused Balraj Singh and Mehtab Singh, who have been granted

-3the concession of bail by this Court. After the completion of investigation, challan has been presented in Court and out of 24 witnesses cited by the prosecution, none has been examined till date. The criminal liability, if any, of the petitioner, could only be determined after the conclusion of trial, which may take sufficient long time. In the circumstances, no purpose would be served by detaining the petitioner any longer. 6.

Consequently, without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court/Judge on Duty/Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case; undertaking to regularly appear on each and every date; not to leave the country without prior permission of the Court; and not to tamper with evidence of prosecution in any manner. 7.

It is further made clear that in case the petitioner is found involved in any case under NDPS Act, after his release on bail, it will be open for the prosecution to move an application for cancellation of his bail in accordance with law.

8.

Any observation made above shall not be construed as opinion of this Court on the merits of the case.

9.

Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed of.

(SANJIV BERRY) JUDGE 21.03.2025 S.Sharma(syr) i) Whether speaking/reasoned?

Yes/No ii) Whether reportable?

Yes/No