Manorath Singh Alias Lavi v. State Of Punjab

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 26.05.2026 Manorath Singh @ Lavi ..... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab .....Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ *****

Present:

Mr. Harmanpreet Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Ekompal Sagoo, AAG, Punjab.

***** RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J. (ORAL) 1.

Present petition has been filed praying for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.146, dated 21.09.2025, under Sections 22, 27(A), 29 of NDPS Act, 1985, registered at Police Station Chattiwind, District Amritsar Rural.

2.

Succinctly, the facts of the case are that the police party was on patrolling on 21.09.2025 and when they reached near the canal bridge on Chabba road, Mandiala, they saw three young persons coming on a motorcycle bearing no.PB-02-AV690 from the front on turn to Chhaba, at the outskirt of village Mandiala, who, on seeing the police party, got perplexed and rider of the motorcycle tried to turn it as well as they attempted to throw the polythene envelopes being carried by them, however, they were apprehended by the police party. On asking, rider of the

-2motorcycle disclosed his name as Manorath Singh @ Lavi (petitioner); the person sitting in middle disclosed his name as Gobinda Singh and the person sitting in the last disclosed his name as Jashanpreet Singh @ Raja. They were suspected to be carrying some contraband in the polythene bags being carried by them and thus, offer of search was given. On conducting the search, 135 loose intoxicant tablets were recovered from Manorath Singh @ Lavi (petitioner), 115 loose intoxicant tablets were recovered from Gobinda Singh and drug money amounting to Rs.300/- was recovered from Jashanpreet Singh @ Raja, and in total 250 intoxicant tablets containing Tramadol had been recovered from them. They failed to produce any license regarding the conscious possession of the same.

Thus, the FIR in question was registered and accused were arrested at the spot. Thereafter, on completion of the investigation, challan has been presented. The petitioner approached the Court of learned Judge, Special Court, Amritsar praying for the grant of regular bail. However, after hearing both the sides and finding no merit in the same, the learned Judge, Special Court, Amritsar declined the bail application filed by the petitioner vide order dated 02.04.2026. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court by way of filing the present petition praying for the grant of regular bail.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely and frivolously implicated in the present case. He, at the outset, prays for the grant of bail to the petitioner on the basis of parity with that of the co-accused, namely, Gobinda Singh @ Gobida Singh and Jashanpreet Singh @ Raja. He has drawn the attention of this Court to the order dated 25.03.2026, passed in CRM-M-71594-2025 and CRM-M-

-36730-2026, whereby, co-accused, namely, Gobinda Singh @ Gobida Singh and Jashanpreet Singh @ Raja have been granted regular bail by this Court. He has submitted that the case of petitioner is at par with that of the coaccused, who have already been granted bail by this Court. He has submitted that the petitioner is behind bars since the date of his arrest, i.e. 21.09.2025. He has submitted that on the basis of the parity, the petitioner deserves to be granted bail as the case of the petitioner is similar to that of the said coaccused, who have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 25.03.2026.

4.

Learned State counsel has endorsed the factum of grant of bail to the co-accused of the petitioner as stated above and has not denied that the petitioner is at par with the co-accused, namely, Gobinda Singh @ Gobida Singh and Jashanpreet Singh @ Raja. He has produced custody certificate of the petitioner today in the Court, which is taken on record. 5.

Heard.

6.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is deciphered that the petitioner is behind bars since the date of his arrest, i.e. 21.09.2025. Admittedly, co-accused, namely, Gobinda Singh @ Gobida Singh and Jashanpreet Singh @ Raja are on bail and the case of the petitioner as stated is at par with them. Custody certificate produced would show that the petitioner has suffered an incarceration of 08 months and 03 days as on 25.05.2026. It further reflects that the petitioner is involved in 03 other cases, however, in 02 of the cases, he is on bail and in 01 case, he has already undergone his sentence.

7.

The veracity of the allegations would be assessed only after the conclusion of the trial and on the appreciation of evidence to be led by both

-4the parties before the trial Court. This Court would refrain itself from commenting anything on the merits of the case. The trial of the case will take sufficient long time. Keeping in view the arguments raised by both the sides and perusing the record, this Court is of the opinion that learned counsel for the petitioner succeeds in making out a case for grant of regular bail to the petitioner on the basis of parity. 8.

Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court/Duty Magistrate. 9.

Nothing said herein shall be treated as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

(RAJESH BHARDWAJ) 26.05.2026 JUDGE rittu Whether Speaking/Reasoned :

Yes/No Whether Reportable :

Yes/No