Kuldeep Singh @ Kuldip Singh @ Rinku v. State Of Punjab

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 27.05.2026 Kuldeep Singh @ Kuldip Singh @ Rinku ..... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab .......Respondent

CORAM:

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

Present:

Mr. Yajur Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Raj Karan Singh, Asstt. A.G., 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.01, dated 02.01.2026, under Sections 21, 27-A of NDPS Act, 1985 (Sections 21-B, 29 of NDPS Act added lateron), registered at Police Station Chatiwind, District Amritsar (Rural).

2.

Succinctly, the facts of the case are that the police party was on patrolling on 02.01.2026 and when they reached on the bridge canal adjoining village Warpal, they saw a young man coming on foot from the left side of link road. On seeing the police party, he got perplexed and thew a plastic envelope after taking out from the right pocket of his lower, however, the police apprehend him with the help of the police officials. On asking, he disclosed his name to be Satnam Singh. He was suspected to be carrying some contraband in the plastic envelope having

-2thrown by him and thus, search of the same was conducted. On conducting the search of the plastic envelope, 5.68 grams of heroin was recovered. He failed to produce any licence regarding the conscious possession of the same, thus, the FIR was registered and he was arrested on the spot. On registration of the FIR, the investigation commenced. The samples taken were sent to the FSL. During the investigation, complicity of the petitioner, namely, Kuldeep Singh @ Kuldip Singh @ Rinku was surfaced as was found to be the supplier of the contraband. Hence, he was also arrayed as an accused in the present case. Resultantly, the petitioner was arrested on 06.01.2026. 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 dismissed the bail application filed by the petitioner vide order dated 23.04.2026. Hence being aggrieved, the petitioner has approached this Court praying for the grant of regular bail by way of filing the present petition.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner has been falsely and frivolously implicated in the present case. He, at the outset, prays for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner on the basis of parity with that of the co-accused, namely, Pawanpreet Singh @ Bhaga. He has drawn the attention of this Court to the order dated 22.05.2026, passed in CRM-M-28458-2026, whereby, co-accused, namely, Pawanpreet Singh @ Bhaga has been granted regular bail by this Court. He has submitted that the case of petitioner is at par with that of the co-accused, who has already been granted bail by this Court. He

-3has submitted that the petitioner is behind bars since the date of his arrest, i.e. 06.01.2026. 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 co-accused, who has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 22.05.2026.

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, Pawanpreet Singh @ Bhaga. 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. 06.01.2026. Admittedly, co-accused, namely, Pawanpreet Singh @ Bhaga is on bail and the case of the petitioner as stated is at par with him. Custody certificate produced would show that the petitioner has suffered an incarceration of 04 months and 19 days as on 26.05.2026. It further reflects that the petitioner is not involved in any other case.

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 the parties before the trial Court. 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.

-48.

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) 27.05.2026 JUDGE rittu Whether Speaking/Reasoned :

Yes/No Whether Reportable :

Yes/No