Gurvinder Singh Alias Guri v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 29.05.2026 GURVINDER SINGH ALIAS GURI ... PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB ... RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present:- Mr. K.S.Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner.

H.S. GREWAL, J. (ORAL) 1.

The petitioner is seeking regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (439 Cr.P.C.) in FIR No. 76 dated 27.06.2024, under Section 22 of the NDPS Act [Section 29 of NDPS Act was added lateron vide DDR No. 34 dated 28.06.2024], registered at Police Station Makhu, District Ferozepur.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that 2500 intoxicating tablets, namely Clovidol-100 SR containing Tramadol Hydrochloride were allegedly recovered from the petitioner and his co-accused Harpreet Singh @ Dhalla while they were travelling on motorcycle bearing registration No. PB-05U1165. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the petitioner is in custody for the last 01 year, 10 months and 27 days and is not involved in any other case. He, thus, prays for grant of bail to the petitioner.

4.

Notice of motion.

5.

Mr. Sandeep Kumar, D.A.G., Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the State and has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of regular bail to the petitioner on the ground of gravity of allegations. Learned State counsel has filed the custody certificate in Court, which is taken on record. He further submits that as per the custody certificate, the petitioner is in custody for the last 01 year, 10 months and 27 days and out of total cited 22 prosecution witnesses, only 02 witnesses have been examined so far. 6.

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

7.

After hearing the rival contentions of the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case that the petitioner is in custody for the last 01 year, 10 months and 27 days; he is not involved in any other case; out of total cited 22 prosecution witnesses, only 02 witnesses have been examined so far; the conclusion of trial is likely to take some time and continuous detention of the petitioner would not serve the ends of justice, this Court deems it fit to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner 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.

9.

Nothing discussed hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 10.

It is clarified that while 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. 11.

Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

(H.S.GREWAL) 29.05.2026 JUDGE Janki Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No