Aman Kumar @ Amna v. State Of Punjab
CRM-M-40099-2025 (O&M) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH 213-A CRM-M-40099-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 03.12.2025 Aman Kumar @ Amna ....Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY ***** Present :
Mr. Ashish Pundir and Mr. Tajveer Singh, Advocates for the petitioner
***** AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL) 1.
Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 483 BNSS is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.75 dated 27.04.2025, registered under Sections 18 of NDPS Act and 52-A of Prisons Act, (Sections 61 and 85 of NDPS Act added later on) at Police Station City-I, Sangrur, District Sangrur.
2.
Learned counsel contends that the petitioner has been in custody for about 7 months. He alleges false implication. It is only during the investigation that he came to be implicated in the present case. The allegations against him are of having used two smart watches and supplying of contraband. Co-accused Gurchet Singh has since been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 17.11.2025, after being in custody for 6 months and 2 days and had 10 cases against him, besides one Banso Bai on 17.11.2025, Prasant Majumdar and Gurpreet Singh by order of even date. Challan was presented on 06.10.2025 and the charges have not been framed and total 46 prosecution witnesses have been
CRM-M-40099-2025 (O&M) 2 cited. The petitioner is involved in 27 more case, wherein he is on bail. Reliance is placed on the judgment passed by Hon'ble The Supreme Court titled as Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi vs. State of U.P. and others, 2012(2) SCC 382.
3.
Status report along with custody certificate dated 30.11.2025 and 02.12.2025, filed by the learned State counsel are taken on record. As per the same, the petitioner is behind bars for 7 months. 4.
Learned State counsel opposes the bail on the ground that there are specific allegations against the petitioner of using the smart watches and sim cards, recovered from him to facilitate the contraband to be provided to the inmates. However, he is unable to controvert the submissions with regard to stage, co-accused having been granted bail and the petitioner being on bail in other cases.
5.
Heard.
6.
Hon'ble The Supreme Court in the case of Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi (Supra)had held that, "As observed by the High Court, merely on the basis of criminal antecedents, the claim of the second respondent cannot be rejected. In other words, it is the duty of the Court to find out the role of the accused in the case in which he has been charged and other circumstances such as possibility of fleeing away from the jurisdiction of the Court, etc." Reiterating in Prabhakar Tewari vs. State of UP and another, (2020) 11 SCC 648, it was observed that, "The offence alleged no doubt is grave and serious and there are several criminal cases pending against the accused. These factors by themselves cannot be the basis for refusal of prayer for bail." 7.
CRM-M-40099-2025 (O&M) 3 ! ! "
!
#$%#&#&' (
)$ * * ( (
&% + 8.
The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail, subject to furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case and shall abide by the following conditions:- (i) The petitioner will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii) The petitioner will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The petitioner will appear before the trial Court on each and every date fixed, unless is exempted by a specific order of Court.
(iv) The petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which, he is an accused, or for commission of which he is suspected of.
(v) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly coerce, induce, threaten or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/ her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence in any manner. (vi) The petitioner shall not in any manner misuse his liberty.
(vii) The petitioner shall furnish his address and mobile number by way of an affidavit to the trial Court and not change the same till conclusion of trial and if for any reasons, he seeks to change either of the aforesaid, it shall be done only with prior information to the learned trial Court.
(viii) The petitioner shall not leave the country without prior permission of the trial Court.
(ix) The trial Court/Duty Magistrate may impose any other condition, as deemed appropriate while releasing the
CRM-M-40099-2025 (O&M) 4 petitioner.
9.
It is made abundantly clear that in case there is any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the State shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail as granted to the petitioner by this order.
10.
In view of the above, it is clarified that the observations made herein above are limited for the purpose of present proceedings and would not be construed as any opinion on the merits of the case and the trial would proceed independently of the aforesaid observations.
(AMAN CHAUDHARY) JUDGE 03.12.2025 M.Kamra Whether speaking/reasoned :
Yes / No Whether reportable :
Yes / No