Sajan Singh @ Sajan v. State Of Punjab

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 01.07.2026 SAJAN SINGH @ SAJAN ... PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB ... RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present:- Mr. Lokesh Garg, Advocate for Mr. Kushagra Mahajan, Advocate for the petitioner. H.S. Grewal, J.(Oral) 1.

This petition has been filed for grant of regular bail under Section 483 of BNSS (erstwhile Section 439 Cr.P.C) in case FIR No. 95 dated 07.04.2026 under Sections 21, 27(A) of NDPS Act registered at Police Station Jandiala, District Amritsar.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner has been found in conscious possession of heroin weighing 08 gram along with drug money of Rs.600/-. During interrogation, the petitioner allegedly admitted that the cash had been earned through the sale of heroin.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and has been nominated as an

-2accused due to political influence. He further submits that the petitioner is in custody since 07.04.2026 and prays for grant of regular bail. 4.

Notice of motion.

5.

Mr. Sandeep Kumar, learned DAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and has vehemently opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature. Learned State counsel has filed the custody certificate in Court today, which is taken on record. As per the custody certificate, the petitioner has been in custody for the last 02 months and 22 days and the petitioner is not involved in any other case. 6.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

7.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case and the fact that the petitioner is in custody for the last 02 months and 22 days; 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 bonds, surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned.

-39.

It is clarified that if on bail so granted through the instant order, the petitioner is found indulging in any other criminal case it shall be open to the State to seek cancellation of his bail.

10.

Pending applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of. 01.07.2026 (H.S.GREWAL) renu JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No