Gurdeep Singh @ Baba v. State Of Punjab

- 1 -

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Decided on : 25.03.2026 Gurdeep Singh @ Baba . . . Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Punjab . . . Respondent(s)

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH PRESENT: Mr. Abhaysher Singh, Advocate for the petitioner(s).

Mr. Vimal Malhotra, DAG, Punjab.

**** SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral) 1.

The instant petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C.), for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, during the pendency of trial, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed here-under:- Name of Petitioner(s) FIR No.

Date Section(s) Police Station District Gurdeep Singh @ Baba 28.03.2025 22 of NDPS Act, 1985 Shambu Patiala [S. 29 of NDPS Act, added later on] 2.

In the present case, on 27.11.2025, following was recorded by this Court:- "2.

At the outset, learned State counsel has filed the custody certificate dated 26.11.2025 and status report dated 22.11.2025 in Court today, which are taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. Office to tag the same at appropriate place.

Copies thereof have been handed over to the counsel for the petitioner.

3.

In the instant case, there is total recovery of 4200 tablets of Alprazolam were recovered from the co-accused Gorkha Singh and Gurcharan Singh. Thereafter, on the disclosure statement of the said accused, name of the petitioner - Gurdeep Singh was involved in the present case, as

- 2 - an accused.

As per the disclosure statement, it was disclosed by the coaccused that said tablets were procured by them from Delhi Sabji Mandi and to procure the same, petitioner had given them an amount of Rs.3,000/- (each) towards travel and miscellaneous expenses and also with an assurance to give some tablets for self consumption. Besides, an amount of Rs.13,000/- was also transferred in the bank account of one person (supplier) in Delhi and instructed them to contact him upon arrival in Delhi. 4.

From perusal of the status report, it is revealed that petitioner is involved in four other criminal cases, i.e., two under the NDPS Act and two cases under different Sections of IPC.

5.

For further consideration, adjourned to 27.01.2026." 3.

Today, at the outset, learned State counsel has filed the custody certificate dated 24.03.2026 in Court today, which is taken on record. Office to tag the same at appropriate place.

A copy thereof has been handed over to the counsel for the petitioner.

4.

Learned State counsel, while opposing the prayer for bail, submits that as per the custody certificate, the petitioner - Gurdeep Singh @ Baba is inside the jail for a period of about 09 months and 07 days and is involved in other criminal cases, including two under the NDPS Act. The details of such cases are as under:- (i) FIR No.92 dated 01.12.2014 under Section 15 of the NDPS Act, registered at Police Station Kabarwala, District Sri Muktsar Sahib; and (ii) FIR No.33 dated 19.06.2018 under Sections 22/61/85 of the NDPS Act, registered at Police Station Sadiq. In response, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in FIR No.92 (supra), the petitioner was convicted on 26.09.2017 and

- 3 - sentenced only to undergo imprisonment for a period of six months, which indicates that the recovery therein was of non-commercial quantity. It is further submitted that in FIR No.33 (supra), the petitioner has already been acquitted of the charges. Thus, as of now, there is no other case under the NDPS Act in which the petitioner is either involved or stands convicted. 5.

Heard.

6.

Considering the totality of the circumstances and keeping in view the fact that the petitioner has been nominated in the present case on the basis of the disclosure statement of the co-accused, it would be incumbent upon the prosecution to establish, by leading cogent and substantive evidence, the alleged connectivity of the petitioner with the main accused as a supplier.

At this stage, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, and considering the period of incarceration already undergone, this Court is of the view that further detention of the petitioner inside the jail would not serve any useful purpose.

Accordingly, present petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, subject to his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/ Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Illaqa Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case. 7.

Needless to observe that the petitioner shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witness in any manner directly or indirectly.

8.

Any of the discussion done and recorded here-above, shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the facts of the case. Therefore,

- 4 - trial Court is expected to decide the case by taking an independent view, on the basis of evidence available on record, as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law.

9.

It is further made clear that if, in future, petitioner is directly found indulged in similar kind of activities, this order shall be deemed to be cancelled.

10.

Petition stands disposed of.

Misc. application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE March 25, 2026 J.Ram Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No