Arshdeep Singh v. State Of Punjab
-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision:20.01.2026 Karan Gehlot
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
...Respondent
2) Arshdeep Singh
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY ***** Present :
Mr. Rishu Mahajan, Advocate, for the petitioner in CRM-M-42561-2025.
Mr. G. S. Bawa, Advocate, for the petitioner in CRM-M-56794-2025.
***** AMAN CHAUDHARY. J.
1.
Prayer in both these petitions filed under Section 483
is for grant of regular bail to the petitioners in case FIR No.53 dated 06.09.2024, registered under Sections 22/25/27-A/29 NDPS Act and 25 of the Arms Act and Sections 317(2) and 341(2) of BNS Act at Police Station Special Operation Cell, Amritsar. 2.
Learned counsel contend that the petitioner in CRM-M-42561-2025 has been in custody for 1 year, 3 months and 1 day, while petitioner in CRM-M-
-256794-2025 has been in custody for 1 year, 1 month and 13 days. Their names surfaced based on the disclosure statements of the co-accused Gurdeep Singh @ Sona and Gurwinder Singh, who were apprehended at the spot with commercial quantity of contraband. No recovery has been effected from both the petitioners. Charges have been framed on 16.07.2025, however, out of total 31 prosecution witnesses, only 01 has been examined. Both the petitioners are not involved in any other case.
3.
Status report by way of an affidavit of Deputy Superintendent of Police, SSOC Amritsar (in CRM-M-42561-2025) and the custody certificates dated 19.01.2026, filed by the learned State counsel are taken on record. As per the same, petitioner in CRM-M-42561-2025 is behind bars for 1 year, 03 months and 1 day and petitioner in CRM-M-56794-2025 is behind bars for 1 year, 1 month and 13 days.
4.
Learned State counsel opposes the bail on the ground that there were specific allegations against the petitioners by their co-accused in their !" #$ $%$ %# $ #$ &$$$$"#&$$!'#%$#$ CRM-M42561-2025 and one mobile phone has been recovered from petitioner in CRMM-56794-2025 for the networking. However, he is unable to controvert the submissions with regard to stage of the case and the petitioners being not involved in any other case.
5.
Heard.
6.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in particular that the petitioner in CRM-M-42561-2025 is in custody for 1 year, 3 months and 1 day
-3and petitioner in CRM-M-56794-2025 is in custody for 1 year, 1 month and 13 days; not involved in any other case; charges were framed on 16.07.2025; out of 31 prosecution witnesses, only 01 has been examined so far, the trial is likely to take a considerable time; further incarceration of the petitioner would be violative of his right enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act can be diluted bearing in mind the right to a speedy trial, both the present petitions are allowed. 7.
The petitioners are 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 petitioners will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii) The petitioners will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The petitioners will appear before the trial Court on each and every date fixed, unless are exempted by a specific order of Court.
(iv) The petitioners shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which, they are accused, or for commission of which they are suspected of.
(v) The petitioners 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 petitioners shall not in any manner misuse their liberty.
(vii) The petitioners shall furnish their addresses and mobile number by way of their respective affidavits to the trial Court and not change the same till conclusion of trial and if for any reasons, they seek to change either of the aforesaid, it shall be done only with prior information to the learned trial Court.
-4- (viii) The petitioners 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 petitioners.
8.
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 petitioners by this order.
9.
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.
10.
##"##' #!$$ "$!# $' $ #' $# $ "#$"$!"$ (AMAN CHAUDHARY) JUDGE 20.01.2026 dinesh Whether speaking/reasoned :
Yes/No Whether reportable :
Yes/No