Manpreet Singh Alias Dhillon v. State Of Punjab

CRM-M-19067-2026 (O&M) -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-19067-2026 (O&M) Decided on: 17.04.2026 MANPREET SINGH @ DHILLON ......Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB ......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHAS MEHLA

Present:

Mr. Lavanya Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner.

**** SUBHAS MEHLA, J. (Oral) 1.

The present petition has been filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 seeking grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No.13 dated 31.01.2026 under Sections 21, 27 & 29 of NDPS Act, 1985, registered at Police Station Nandgarh, District Bathinda.

2.

Brief facts of the case are that on 31.01.2026, Manpreet Singh @ Dhillon (the present petitioner) alongwith co-accused Lovepreet Singh @ Lavi was apprehended by the police on the basis of suspicion while they were searching something in a polythene. From the petitioner, a polythene was recovered and upon checking the same, 06 gram of heroin was recovered.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the contraband allegedly, recovered from the present petitioner, is marginally

CRM-M-19067-2026 (O&M) -2higher than the small quantity; the petitioner is involved in other criminal cases; investigation in the present case is almost complete and therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars; trial will take sufficient time to conclude; the petitioner is stated to have been in custody since 31.01.2026 and as such, prays for concession of regular bail.

4.

Notice of motion.

5.

Mr. Subhash Godara, Addl. A.G., Punjab, who is present in Court, accepted notice on behalf of respondent-State, and by way of filing of custody certificate dated 16.04.2026 and opposed the concession of regular bail to the petitioner and submitted that the petitioner is a habitual offender and is involved in as many as 08 cases of similar nature; the petitioner was apprehended alongwith the co-accused with 06 grams of heroin. He, however, fairly admits that investigation in the present case is almost complete; the petitioner has been in custody for a period of 02 months & 15 days.

6.

Heard.

7.

Taking into consideration the facts & circumstances of the present case and the contentions raised by learned counsel for the parties and the fact that the alleged contraband i.e. 06 grams of heroin recovered from the petitioner alongwith co-accused falls in the category of intermediate quantity; investigation is almost complete; the present petitioner is in custody for the last more than 02 months; trial will take sufficient time to conclude and no fruitful purpose would be served by

CRM-M-19067-2026 (O&M) -3keeping him in custody for any further period, as concession of bail cannot be denied just as a measure of punishment as culpability is to be decided by trial Court after appreciating evidence adduced by the parties, and it is a trite principle of criminal jurisprudence that bail is rule, jail is an exception, this Court deems it a fit case to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner.

8.

Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned.

9.

Nothing observed herein shall be construed as an opinion on the merits of the main case.

(SUBHAS MEHLA) JUDGE 17.04.2026 Sonia Puri Whether Speaking/Reasoned: YES/NO Whether Reportable:

YES/NO