Mangal Singh v. State Of Punjab
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
Sr. No.224 Case No. : CRM-M-36964-2025 Decided On : November 04, 2025 Mangal Singh ....
Petitioner vs.
State of Punjab ....
Respondent CORAM :
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUKHVINDER KAUR.
* * * Present :
Mr. Hitesh Verma, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. P. S. Pandher, AAG, Punjab.
* * * SUKHVINDER KAUR , J.
:
Prayer in the present petition, filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, in case FIR No.90 dated 07.03.2025, under Sections 22, 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as - NDPS Act), registered at Police Station Barnala, District Barnala.
As per prosecution case, co-accused namely Mindo, Rekha, Whisky and Mohit Sharma were found in possession of 1000 tablets of CALMPIK-0.5 (Alprazolam Tablets IP 0.50 mg). Accordingly, all of them were arrested and the present petitioner was nominated as an accused in the present case on the basis of statement of aforesaid co-accused, vide GD No.20 dated 13.03.2025.
Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that no recovery had been effected from the petitioner and he is not connected with the offence in the present case. The petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case only on the basis of statement of one Rajesh, which is not admissible in law. He prayed that the petitioner is no more required for further investigation and the present petition be allowed. Learned State counsel opposed the present petition and submitted that the petitioner used to purchase intoxicant tablets from coaccused Mindo in order to sell the same to customers. So, the petitioner has been found involved in the drug trafficking and had played a specific role in the commission of present offence. Hence, he is not entitled to the concession of bail.
I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the case file.
The petitioner was nominated as accused on the statement of Rajesh Kumar, who stated that on 13.03.2025, Mangal Singh (petitioner) and his friend Pardeep Singh came to him. Mangal Singh told him that Mindo wife of Jaila Singh, who lived in Jhuggian of 22 Akre Barnala, had been arrested by police, from whom they both used to purchase intoxicant tablets for further selling to the customers. They had come to know that Mindo disclosed their names before the police and police was looking for them. Thereafter, petitioner was nominated as accused in this case vide DDR No.20 dated 13.03.2025. Thus, in the present case, alleged recovery of 1000 intoxicant tablets had been effected from the co-accused and no
recovery had been effected from the petitioner. No other material, except the statement of aforesaid Rajesh Kumar,, has been placed on record to connect the petitioner with the alleged offence in question. As per the Custody Certificate dated 03.11.2025, which has been placed on record, the petitioner has already undergone custody of 07 months and 21 days. Trial of the case is going on. Complicity of the petitioner is a matter of trial, conclusion whereof is likely to take considerable time. So, no useful purpose would be served by further detaining the petitioner behind the bars.
Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be admitted on regular bail, on furnishing adequate bail bonds and surety bonds, to the satisfaction of concerned learned Trial Judge/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate.
However, nothing observed herein above shall be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. The observations recorded above are only for the purpose of deciding the present bail petition. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of along with the present petition.
November 04, 2025 (SUKHVINDER KAUR) monika JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned ?
Yes/No.
Whether reportable ?
Yes/No.