Raunak Singh @ Raunaky v. State Of Punjab

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

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB ... RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present:- Mr. Kamal Gupta, Advocate and Mr. Sanish Girdhar,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. 34 dated 18.03.2025 under Sections 21, 29 of NDPS Act (Sections 21-C, 27A of NDPS Act added later on) ; Sections 25(6), 25(7)(i), 25(8) of Arms Act and Sections 109,221 of BNS (Corresponding Sections 307,186 of IPC) registered at Police Station Jhabal District Tarn Taran.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that on 18.03.2025, a police party headed by SI Charanjit Singh was present at Jhabal Chowk for patrolling duty, when a secret information was received to the effect that Ajay Pal Singh alias Ajay Motta, Deepak Singh alias Deep and the present petitioner were involved in the illegal trade of heroin and illicit arms on a large scale. On the basis of the said secret information, the present FIR was registered against the aforesaid accused persons. Thereafter, co-accused Ajay Pal Singh alias Ajay Motta was apprehended and 447 grams of heroin was allegedly recovered from him along

-2with one pistol, magazine and live cartridges. However, no recovery of any contraband or weapon has been effected from the present petitioner and he was arrested separately and not from the spot.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and no contraband or weapon has been recovered from his conscious possession. It is contended that the entire case against the petitioner is based upon secret information and subsequent disclosure statements of co-accused, which are inadmissible as evidence and carry no evidentiary value. It is further argued that the alleged recovery of 447 grams of heroin was effected from co-accused Ajay Pal Singh alias Ajay Motta and not from the present petitioner, who was neither apprehended at the spot nor connected with any recovery. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is not involved in any other case and has clean antecedents. It is further submitted that the co-accused have already granted concession of regular bail by this Court. The petitioner is in custody since 18.03.2025 and the trial is likely to take considerable time. Therefore, continued incarceration of the petitioner would serve no useful purpose and he deserves the concession of regular bail.

4.

Notice of motion.

5.

Mr. K.D.Sachdeva, DAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and vehemently opposes the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature. He further submits that the petitioner is in custody since 18.03.2025 and is not involved in any other case.

-36.

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

7.

In view of the above submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the facts that the petitioner is in custody since 18.03.2025; no recovery has been effected from the petitioner; not involved in any other case; co-accused have been granted concession of regular bail and that the trial is likely to take a long time, therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner during the pendency of the trial as the continuous detention of the petitioner would not serve the ends of justice.

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 learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned. 9.

However, it is made clear that in case the petitioner misuses the concession of bail, the State would be at liberty to seek cancellation of his bail. 01.07.2026 (H.S.GREWAL) renu JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No