Kuldeep Singh Alias Golu v. State Of Punjab
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
Sr.No.207 Case No. : CRM-M-21196-2025 Decided On : May 20, 2025 Kuldeep Singh @ Golu ....
Petitioner vs.
State of Punjab ....
Respondent CORAM :
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUKHVINDER KAUR.
* * * Present :
Mr. Sukhcharan Singh Gill, Advocate and Ms. Navreet Kaur, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. P. S. Pandher, AAG, Punjab.
* * * SUKHVINDER KAUR , J.
:
Prayer in the present petition, filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No.48 dated 16.03.2025, under Sections 22/29/61/85 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as - NDPS Act), registered at Police Station City Sunam, District Sangrur.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case, only on the basis of disclosure statement of the co-accused, which is not admissible in law. He has contended that no recovery was effected from the petitioner and the alleged recovery was effected from the co-accused namely Laddi Singh. He
has further urged that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required for any purpose and therefore, he be granted concession of anticipatory bail. Notice in this case was issued on 25.04.2025 and Status Report was called from the State, which has already been filed on the last date of hearing.
Learned State counsel has opposed the present bail petition while contending that the petitioner was supplier of the intoxicant tablets that had been recovered from co-accused Laddi Singh. He has also submitted that 12 more FIRs have been registered against the petitioner. In the present case, FIR was registered on the basis of secret information that co-accused Laddi Singh was habitual of selling intoxicant tablets after receiving supply from Kuldeep Singh @ Golu (petitioner). Thereafter, after conducting of raid by the police party, 900 intoxicant tablets were recovered from the co-accused Laddi Singh. Thus, the petitioner had also been named in the FIR with the specific allegations that the main accused was receiving the supply of contraband from the petitioner.
Then, during investigation of the case, co-accused Laddi Singh also suffered disclosure statement that the recovered intoxicant tablets had been supplied to him by the petitioner. Thus, as per the allegations, the petitioner has been instrumental in regulating the supply and sale of intoxicant tablets. Though he was not present at the spot, yet as per the allegations, he had supplied the intoxicant tabelts, which had been allegedly recovered from the co-accused.
NDPS Act.
Keeping in view the specific allegations regarding involvement of the petitioner in drug trafficking and his past criminal antecedents, no ground for granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner is made out. Accordingly, the present petition stands dismissed. May 20, 2025 (SUKHVINDER KAUR) monika JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned ?
Yes/No.
Whether reportable ?
Yes/No.