Baljit Singh @ Baljeet Singh v. State Of Punjab
- 1 -
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH Decided on : 17.03.2026 Baljit Singh @ Baljeet Singh . . . Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Punjab . . . Respondent(s)
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH PRESENT: Mr. Ruhani Chadha, Advocate for the petitioner(s).
Mr. Jasdeep Singh, Addl. AG, 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 Baljit Singh @ Baljeet Singh 02.09.2024 22-C of NDPS Act, 1985 Sadar Abohar Fazilka 2.
After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, following order was passed on 18.11.2025:- "2.
In the present case, there is a recovery of 5500 Tramadol Hydrochloride tablets. To enable learned State counsel to file the status report in the main case showing evidence collected against the petitioner, the proceedings were deferred for 11.11.2025. 3.
However, there being a prayer for releasing the petitioner on interim bail for a period of six months, the petition was taken up for its hearing and on 06.11.2025, the following order was passed:- "(i) Petitioner - Baljit Singh @ Baljeet Singh, aged about 28 years, has filed the instant petition under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, for grant of regular bail as well as interim bail in case FIR No. 60, dated 02.09.2024, under
- 2 - Section 22-C of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, registered at Police Station Sadar, Abohar, District Fazilka.
(ii) In regard to the prayer for interim bail, learned counsel for the petitioner refers to the order dated 09.07.2025, passed by this Court in CRM-M-29776-2025 (Annexure P-6), and submits that petitioner's wife is suffering from CEMRI brain tumor and undergoing treatment at PGIMER, Chandigarh. Rather, after undergoing her first surgery, wife of the petitioner has lost eye-sight of one of the eye. In that regard, learned counsel has referred to the photographs attached with the present petition as Annexure P-8.
(iii) Notice of motion.
(iv) Mr. Neeraj Madaan, learned Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, who is present in the Court, accepts notice, and prays for sometime for verifying the contentions submitted by petitioner's counsel. (v) List again on 11.11.2025, to go through the verification report to be filed by the respondent - State, and to consider the plea of interim-bail.
To be shown in the urgent list."
4.
After verifying the stated facts regarding the ailment of wife of the petitioner, learned State counsel on instructions from ASI Lakhwinder Singh submits that the facts narrated are found to be correct and wife of the petitioner infact is in serious condition and he has no objection, if considering the health of the wife of the petitioner, his prayer is dealt with in accordance with law.
5.
I have considered the plea of the interim bail and the grounds recorded in the earlier order and the same having been verified by the learned State counsel, this Court is of the view that it would be appropriate to release the petitioner on interim bail. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on interim bail for a period of two months i.e. uptill 19.01.2026, subject to his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/ Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Illaqa Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned.
6.
On the next date of hearing, State would again verify the health condition of the wife of the petitioner and will accordingly apprise the Court.
7.
For consideration of regular bail, list again on 19.01.2026." 3.
When the petition was taken up for hearing on 19.01.2026, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that after surgery, the petitioner's wife has completely lost her vision and is unable to manage on her own. It was further submitted that there is a child aged about 02 years,
- 3 - and there is no other person to look after the family. Considering the family circumstances and the medical condition of the petitioner's wife, the interim bail was extended, which is continuing till date.
4.
Today, at the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the condition of the petitioner's wife remains unchanged and his presence is still required at home. It is further submitted that the prayer for grant of regular bail is not being pressed at this stage. However, a request is made for continuation of interim bail for a further period of four months, to enable the petitioner to take care of his family. 5.
On the other hand, learned State counsel is unable to point out any instance of misuse of the concession of interim bail by the petitioner. On instructions, it is also submitted that out of total 12 prosecution witnesses, only 02 witnesses have been examined so far.
6.
In view of the above, prayer for regular bail is disposed of as not pressed.
However, the interim bail granted to the petitioner is ordered to continue for a further period of four months from today, i.e., up-till 17.07.2026.
Needless to mention here that the petitioner shall surrender back to the Jail Authorities on 17.07.2026 at or before 05:00 P.M., in compliance to the directions passed by this Court.
Since, 10 prosecution witnesses are yet to be examined, the learned trial Court is directed to expedite the proceedings and, if possible, conclude the trial within the period for which the petitioner has been granted interim bail.
- 4 - 7.
With the aforesaid observations and directions, the present petition stands disposed of.
Let a copy of this order be forwarded to the learned trial Court for information and compliance.
Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE March 17, 2026 J.Ram Whether speaking/reasoned:
Yes/No Whether Reportable:
Yes/No