Kuldeep Singh v. State Of Punjab

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 26.05.2026 KULDEEP SINGH ... PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF HARYANA ... RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present:- Mr. Damanjit Singh Sandhu, Advocate for the petitioner. H.S. Grewal, J.(Oral) 1.

This petition has been filed under section 483 B.N.S.S. (earlier 439 Cr.P.C.) for grant of regular bail in case FIR No. 64 dated 09.04.2025 under Sections 15/18 NDPS Act and Sections 25/61 of NDPS Act added later on registered at Police Station- Sadar Khanna, District Ludhiana Punjab . 2.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner was apprehended along with a truck (Trala) bearing registration No. PB-23-K-8885, from which 50 kilograms of poppy husk and 250 grams of opium were allegedly recovered. During the course of investigation, the petitioner, pursuant to his disclosure statement, also got recovered 505 grams of opium. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely implicated in the present case. He further submit that the recovery of poppy husk is at margin of commercial category and 755 grams of opium is non commercial. It is further submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 09.04.2025 and prays for grant of regular bail.

-24.

Notice of motion.

5.

Ms. Malvika Singh, DAG,Haryana accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of regular bail on the ground that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature. . She has filed the custody certificate of the petitioner in Court today, which is taken on record. As per the custody certificate, the petitioner has been in custody for the last 01 year 01 month and 10 days and is not involved in any other cases.

6.

I have heard the submissions made by the parties and gone through the record.

7.

After hearing the rival contentions and considering the fact that in the case in hand, the petitioner is in custody for the last 01 year 01 month and 10 days; the petitioner is not involved in any other case coupled with the fact that the trial is likely to take considerable time, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served by further incarceration of the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is granted the concession of regular bail during the pendency of the trial.

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 bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.

9.

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

-310.

It is clarified that if while on bail so granted through the instant order, the petitioner is found indulged in any other criminal case/activity, it shall be open to the State to seek cancellation of his bail. 26.05.2026 (H.S.GREWAL) renu JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No