Haider Bhatti v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-54201-2025 Date of Decision : 07.11.2025 HAIDER BHATTI .... PETITIONER -1V/S STATE OF PUNJAB .... RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHAS MEHLA Present :

Ms. Navneet Kaur Waraich, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Sandeep Kumar, DAG, Punjab.

**** SUBHAS MEHLA, J. (Oral) 1.

The present petition has been filed under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 seeking regular bail in case bearing FIR No.177 dated 19.06.2025, under Sections 25 of Arms Act, 1959 and Sections 21, 27-A & 29 of NDPS Act registered at Police Station Islamabad, District Amritsar. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is in custody for the last more than 04 months. The offences are triable by Judicial Magistrate 1st Class. The allegation against the petitioner is that on the basis of a secret information, main accused namely Dhruv @ Bhanu and Aman @ Vishu were arrested on 19.06.2025, on account of having illegal arms ammunition in their possession. Later, upon disclosure statement of the co-accused Aman @ Vishu and Dhruv @ Bhanu, Rajbir Chadha @ Ritik and Ishu were nominated as accused in the instant FIR. Subsequently, co-

accused Rajbir Chadha @ Ritik suffered a disclosure statement whereby -2Haider Bhatti was nominated as accused being the seller/supplier of one pistol .30 bore and 5 live cartridges, which he had sold to Aman @ Vishu and Dhruv @ Bhanu. He contended that the petitioner is not involved in any other case of similar nature. It is also contended that co-accused namely Rajbeer @ Chadha @ Ritik and Ishu have already been granted the concession of regular bail vide order dated 31.10.2025 passed in CRM-M55757-2025 and that of even date in CRM-M-53540-2025 respectively, passed by this Court. Accordingly, prayer has been made for grant of regular bail.


Learned State counsel opposes the grant of bail to the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner is alleged to be involved in drug trafficking and is also possessing illegal weapon. It is further contended that allegations are grave as role of supplier is attributed, hence, prays for dismissal of the regular bail petition.

4.

Heard.

5.

Keeping in view the fact that the investigation in the present case has already been completed; final report under Section 190 of BNSS already stands presented; the petitioner has been in custody for the last more than 04 months; petitioner is nominated on the basis of disclosure statement of co-accused; nothing has been recovered from his possession after his arrest; the co-accused have already been granted the concession of regular bail by this Court; the conclusion of trial will take long time; the offences are triable by Judicial Magistrate 1st Class; no useful purpose would be

served by keeping him in custody for any further period; this Court deems it -3a fit case to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner. 7.

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 bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned. 8.

Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed to be expression of an opinion by this Court on merits of the case. The learned Court below is directed to proceed with the matter on its own merits, lest it may prejudice the trial.

(SUBHAS MEHLA) JUDGE 07.11.2025 Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No