Sarwanraj Singh Alias Swaranraj Singh Alias Cheeni v. State Of Punjab

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 17.03.2026 SARWANRAJ SINGH ALIAS SWARANRAJ SINGH ALIAS CHEENI ... PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB ... RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present:- Mr. Yajur Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Rishabh Singla, AAG, Punjab.

H.S. Grewal, J.(Oral) 1.

This petition has been filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No. 81 dated 10.05.2025 under Sections 21,25,27(a), 29 of NDPS, Act registered at Police Station Beas, District Amritsar.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner, along with co-accused namely Jasandeep Singh @ Jashan, was apprehended, and a recovery of 53.80 grams of heroin, along with a digital weighing scale and a cash amount of Rs. 2,200/-, was effected from the petitioner while he was sitting as a pillion on the motorcycle driven by the co-accused Jasandeep Singh @ Jashan.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the alleged recovery was effected without associating any independent public

-2witness, even though the occurrence took place in a densely populated urban area. He further submits that the co-accused has already been granted bail by the ld. Special Judge, Amritsar. The petitioner is in custody since 10.05.2025. 4.

On the other hand, ld. State counsel has vehemently opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner for the grant of regular bail. He has filed the custody certificate in Court today and the same is taken on record. He further submits that the petitioner is in custody for the last 10 months and 04 days and is involved in three other cases; however, none of them are under the NDPS Act.

5.

I have heard the submissions made by the parties and gone through the record.

6.

Having noticed the aforesaid facts and circumstances and considering the fact that the petitioner is in custody for the last 10 months and 04 days; is not involved in any other case under the NDPS Act and that the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude, this Court is of the opinion that continued detention of the petitioner would serve no useful purpose. 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 bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.

8.

Nothing discussed hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

-39.

It is clarified that if while on bail so granted through the instant order, the petitioner is found indulged in any other criminal case/activity, it shall be open to the State to seek cancellation of his bail. 17.03.2026 (H.S.GREWAL) renu JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No