Mangal Singh Alias Manga Singh Alias Manga v. State Of Punjab

CRM-M-14249-2026 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-14249-2026 Date of decision : 29.04.2026 Date of uploading : 29.04.2026 Mangal Singh Alias Manga Singh Alias Manga .............Petitioner

Versus

State Of Punjab .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL

Present:

Mr. Aditya Anand, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Baljinder Singh Sra, Addl. AG, Punjab.

--- SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL) 1.

Present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.42 dated 17.04.2020 under Sections 22 & 29 of NDPS Act and Section 188 of IPC, registered at Police Station Subhanpur, District Kapurthala. 2.

The gravamen of the allegations against the petitioner is that the petitioner is an accused of being involving in an FIR pertaining to NDPS Act involving alleged recovery of 155 intoxicants tablets from the petitioner.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner has been extended the concession of anticipatory bail by this Court on 16.07.2020, whereinafter he kept appearing till April 2025 but was unable

CRM-M-14249-2026 -2to appear thereafter due to lack of communication from the trial Court's counsel. Learned counsel has further argued that the petitioner, though was declared a proclaimed offender on 12.02.2026, but he surrendered on his own volition before the concerned Court on 17.02.2026 and is in custody since then. Learned counsel has further argued that upon culmination of investigation, challan already stands presented and the petitioner shall continue to appear before the concerned Court and faced trial in accordance with law. Thus, regular bail is prayed for. 4.

Learned State counsel has filed status report by way of affidavit dated 28.04.2026 in Court today. The same be kept on record. Copy thereof has been furnished to learned counsel for the petitioner. Raising submissions in tandem with the said reply, learned State counsel has opposed the present petition by arguing that the allegations raised are serious in nature and thus the petitioner does not deserve the concession of the regular bail. Learned State counsel seeks to place on record custody certificate dated 28.04.2026 in Court, which is taken on record. 5.

I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the available records of the case.

6.

It is not in dispute that the petitioner was granted the concession of anticipatory bail by this Court on 16.07.2020 and the petitioner continued to appear before the concerned trial Court and faced trial up till 19.04.2025. Keeping in view the fact that the petitioner had earlier been granted the concession of anticipatory bail and had continued to appear before the concerned Court for a period of three and a half years, and has also chosen to surrender on his own volition, this Court is inclined to extend regular bail to the petitioner. It is thus indubitable that culmination

CRM-M-14249-2026 -3of trial will take its own time. The rival contentions raised by learned counsel give rise to debatable issues which shall be ratiocinated upon during the course of trial. This Court does not deem it appropriate to delve deep into these rival contentions, at this stage, lest it may prejudice the trial. Nothing tangible has been brought forward to indicate the likelihood of the petitioner absconding from the process of justice or interfering with the prosecution evidence.

6.1 As per custody certificate dated 28.04.2026 filed by learned State counsel, the petitioner has already suffered incarceration for a period of 2 months and 10 days & is not shown to be involved in any other case. Suffice to say, further detention of the petitioner as an undertrial is not warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case. 7.

In view of above, the present petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Ld. concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate. However, in addition to conditions that may be imposed by the concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate, the petitioner shall remain bound by the following conditions:- (i) The petitioner shall not mis-use the liberty granted. (ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with any evidence, oral or documentary, during the trial.

(iii) The petitioner shall not absent himself on any date before the trial.

(iv) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail. (v) The petitioner shall deposit his passport, if any, with the trial Court.

(vi) The petitioner shall give his cell-phone number to the Investigating Officer/SHO of concerned Police Station and shall not change his cell-phone number without prior permission of the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate.

(vii) The petitioner shall not in any manner try to delay the trial.

CRM-M-14249-2026 -48. In case of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions and those which may be imposed by concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate as directed hereinabove or upon showing any other sufficient cause, the State/complainant shall be at liberty to move cancellation of bail of the petitioner.

9.

Ordered accordingly.

10.

Nothing said hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

11.

Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE 29.04.2026 jatin Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No