← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/28547/2026dismissed

Sunny Singh @ Soni v. State Of Punjab

2026-05-29Mr. Justice Subhas Mehla3 pages

In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Date of Decision:- 29.05.2026 Sunny Singh @ Soni ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHAS MEHLA Present:- Mr. Hitesh Verma, Advocate and Ms. Rajvinder Kaur, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Navreet Kaur, AAG, Punjab.

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

By way of filing the present petition under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (for short - 'the BNSS'), the petitioner is seeking regular bail in case bearing FIR No.66 dated 15.02.2026 (Annexure P-1), under Sections 22 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short - 'the NDPS Act') registered at Police Station City Barnala, District Barnala.

2.

Briefly stated, on 15.02.2026, the police party apprehended co-accused Gurpeet Singh @ Budhu and 600 strips of intoxicating tablets labelled 'Alpraem-0.5' each strip containing 10 tablets, i.e. total 6000 tablets, were recovered from his possession. During the course of interrogation, the petitioner came to be nominated as an accused in the present case.

( 2 ) 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case by adding the offence punishable under Section 29 of the NDPS Act on the basis of disclosure statement of co-accused, who is already in custody of the police; the petitioner is in custody since 19.02.2026, i.e. for the last more than 03 months; except disclosure statement of co-accused, which is inadmissible in evidence, there is nothing on record to show the complicity of the petitioner; and trial will take sufficient time to conclude. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the petitioner is a patient of T.B. Thus, he prayed for grant of regular bail.

4.

Notice of motion.

5.

Ms. Navreet Kaur, AAG, Punjab, accepted notice on behalf of respondent-State and filed short reply by way of affidavit of Mr. Gurcharan Singh Dhaliwal, PPS, Superintendent Central Jail, Patiala, along with custody certificate dated 28.05.2026 of the petitioner and the same is taken on record. Learned State counsel contended that the contraband recovered from the coaccused falls under commercial quantity and accordingly, the petitioner cannot be granted the concession of regular bail in view of rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act. Learned State counsel further submitted that the matter is still under investigation and custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required to conduct a proper investigation. As to the medical condition of the petitioner, learned State counsel submitted that the jail authorities are taking proper care of the petitioner and providing him the best possible medical treatment under the supervision and advice of the Medical Officer, Central

( 3 ) Jail, Patiala. Thus, learned State counsel prayed for dismissal of present petition.

6.

Heard.

7.

As per the rival contentions of learned counsel for the parties and the facts and circumstances of the present case, particularly that a huge quantity of contraband, i.e. 6000 tablets containing 822 grams of Alprazolam were recovered from the possession of the co-accused; the recovered contraband falls under commercial quantity and accordingly, rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act shall apply; as submitted by learned State counsel, the investigation is still ongoing; and custodial interrogation of the petitioner is imperative to conduct a proper investigation and to trace the origin of the recovered contraband and elicit other material details qua the nexus of drug peddling. Moreover, as submitted by learned State counsel proper medical care is being provided to the petitioner by the jail authorities. 8.

In view of the above, this Court finds no merit in the present petition and, therefore, the same is dismissed. 9.

Nothing observed herein-above shall be construed to be an expression of opinion by this Court on the merits of the case. ( SUBHAS MEHLA ) 29.05.2026 JUDGE Geeta Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No