Gurjant Singh @ Janta v. State Of Punjab

-:1:-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH (215) Date of Decision:02.07.2026 GURJANT SINGH @ JANTA ... Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB ... Respondent -.-

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL Present:- Mr. Rishu Mahajan, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Navreet Kaur, AAG, Punjab.

-.- VIRINDER AGGARWAL , J . (Oral) 1.

The present petition has been preferred under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973), seeking the concession of regular bail pending trial in connection with FIR No.58 dated 10.07.2024, registered under Sections 21(c) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, at Police Station Valtoha, District Tarn Taran.

2.

The prosecution case, as emerging from the FIR and the material collected during investigation, is that co-accused Vishal Singh and Amandeep Singh were apprehended on 10.07.2024 while allegedly in conscious possession of 502 grams and 479 grams of heroin respectively, without any valid permit or licence. During the course of investigation, the present applicant-petitioner was nominated as an accused on the basis of

-:2:- the disclosure statements allegedly made by the aforesaid co-accused, and his involvement was invoked under Section 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

3.

Learned State counsel has produced the custody certificate of the applicant-petitioner in Court today. The same is taken on record, subject to all just exceptions.

4.

I have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties at considerable length and have carefully perused the paper-book as well as the material placed on record with their able assistance. 5.

Upon a prima facie consideration of the rival submissions and the material available on record, this Court finds that the applicantpetitioner has not been named in the FIR and has been implicated solely on the basis of the disclosure statements allegedly made by the co-accused during the course of investigation. It is also not disputed that the similarly situated co-accused, namely Gurlal Singh, has already been extended the concession of bail by this Court vide order dated 07.04.2026 passed in CRM-M-14499-2026 (Annexure P-5). The principle of parity, which constitutes a well-recognized facet of bail jurisprudence, therefore, squarely comes into play and deserves due application in the facts of the present case. Furthermore, the applicant-petitioner has remained in judicial custody for one year, eleven months and six days.

The investigation qua the applicant stands concluded and the final report has already been presented before the competent Court. Consequently, his further custodial interrogation is no longer required.

-:3:- reasonable period, having regard to the number of witnesses yet to be examined and the stage of the proceedings. In such circumstances, continued incarceration of the applicant would neither advance the cause of investigation nor serve any useful purpose and would, in effect, amount to prolonged pre-trial detention. Therefore, balancing the competing considerations governing the grant of bail, namely, the principle of parity, the absence of any recovery from the applicant, his implication solely on the basis of disclosure statements, the substantial period of custody already undergone, the completion of investigation, and the remote likelihood of an early conclusion of the trial, this Court is satisfied that the applicantpetitioner has succeeded in making out a fit case for the grant of the concession of regular bail, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the prosecution case.

5.1.

Consequently, the present petition is allowed. The applicantpetitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail, subject to his furnishing requisite bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate/Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, as the case may be, and further subject to the following conditions:- 1.

The applicant-accused shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts before the Court or to the investigating agency.

2.

The applicant-accused shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever, nor shall he attempt, directly

-:4:- or indirectly, to influence, intimidate, or contact any prosecution witness.

3.

The applicant-accused shall not leave the territorial limits of India without obtaining the prior permission of the learned Trial Court. In the event he is in possession of a passport, he shall furnish its particulars before the Investigating Officer as well as the learned Trial Court.

4.

The learned Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, before accepting the bail and surety bonds, shall obtain from the applicant-accused his permanent residential address as well as his present correspondence address, duly supported by appropriate documentary proof. The Investigating Officer shall verify the correctness of the said addresses within 48 hours from the acceptance of the bail bonds and shall place a verification report on the record. In the event either of the addresses is found to be false, fictitious, or incorrect, it shall be open to the prosecution to seek cancellation of the concession of bail in accordance with law. 5.

The applicant-accused shall furnish before the learned Trial Court, either at the time of furnishing the bail bonds or within such period as may be specified by the Court, his Permanent Account Number (PAN), Aadhaar Number, particulars of all operative bank accounts, and a declaration disclosing details of his immovable properties, if any. Any concealment of material particulars or furnishing of false information shall constitute a valid ground for seeking cancellation of bail in accordance with law. 6.

The applicant-accused shall intimate the Investigating Officer as well as the learned Trial Court, in writing, of any change in his residential address or mobile number within seven days from the date of such change.

-:5:- 7.

The applicant-accused shall not commit any offence of a similar nature during the pendency of the trial and shall remain present before the learned Trial Court on each and every date fixed, unless his personal appearance is exempted in accordance with law. He shall not absent himself from the proceedings without obtaining prior permission of the learned Trial Court. In the event of any violation of the aforesaid conditions or his unauthorized absence from the trial proceedings, it shall be open to the learned Trial Court to proceed in accordance with law, including cancellation of the concession of regular bail and issuance of appropriate coercive process, including warrants of arrest.

6.

Since the principal matter stands finally adjudicated, all pending miscellaneous applications, if any, arising therefrom or incidental thereto, shall also stand disposed of in terms of the present order. No further orders are warranted in respect thereof. ( VIRINDER AGGARWAL) 02.07.2026 JUDGE Gaurav Sorot Whether reasoned / speaking?

Yes / No Whether reportable?

Yes / No