Gurvinder Singh Alias Ginder v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Decided on : 23.07.2025 Gurvinder Singh @ Ginder ...... Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ...... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present : Mr. Satnam Singh Gill, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Arun Kumar Gujjar, AAG, Haryana.

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

This is the petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.256 dated 12.06.2024 under Sections 15 of NDPS Act, 1985 (Sections 27 and 29 NDPS Act added later on) registered at Police Station Kurukshetra University District Kurukshetra.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner was named in the FIR in question on the basis of disclosure statement made by co-accused Angrej Singh @ Geja, who was found in possession of 464 kgs of poppy husk. Learned counsel further submits that apart from the disclosure statement, there is no credible evidence against the petitioner. It has also been submitted that although the petitioner is involved in another case under the NDPS case, however, he is on bail in that case. The petitioner has

been in custody since 16.06.2024. The trial will take considerable time to conclude as only 02 witnesses out of 21 cited by the prosecution have been examined so far. A prayer, therefore, has been made to extend the concession of bail to the petitioner. 3.

Status report by way of an affidavit of Sunil Kumar, DSP, HQ, Kurukshetra along with custody certificate of the petitioner has been filed in Court today, which is taken on record. 4.

On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner. He, on instructions, has not been able to dispute that only two out of 21 prosecution witnesses have been examined. It has also not been disputed that the petitioner is on bail in another NDPS case.

5.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material placed on record.

6.

The petitioner has been in custody since 16.06.2024. The trial will take considerable time to conclude as only 2 out of 21 witnesses cited by the prosecution have been examined so far. 7.

In the facts and circumstances as enumerated hereinabove, this Court deems it fit to extend the concession of regular bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner be admitted to bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.

8.

However, it is made clear that anything observed hereinabove shall not be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

9.

Needless to add, in case the petitioner misuses the concession of bail granted to him, the State would be at liberty to seek cancellation of the same.

23.07.2025 (H.S.GREWAL) sonia JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No