← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/66707/2025allowed

Ashok Kumar v. State Of Punjab

2026-01-16Mr. Justice Aman Chaudhary4 pages

 CRM-M-66707-2025 (O&M) 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-66707-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 16.01.2026 Ashok Kumar ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY ***** Present :

Mr. Prikshit Thakur, Advocate for Mr. Rahul Bhargava, Advocate for the petitioner   

    ***** AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL) 1.

Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 483 BNSS is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.134 dated 02.06.2025, registered under Sections 20, 22 of NDPS Act, 223-B of BNS, 52-A of Prisons Act and 13(2) of PC Act (Sections 27, 29, 61, 85 of NDPS Act added later on) at Police Station City Rupnagar, District Rupnagar. 2.

Learned counsel contends that the petitioner has been in custody for 7 months. He alleges false implication. No recovery has been effected from him. He was implicated based on the disclosure statement of co-accused Gurpreet Singh @ Gopi. There is no amount that was stated to have transferred in his account. Co-accused Balwinder Singh has been granted interim anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 23.09.2025, while Sarabjit Singh @ Shanti, Rimpi @ Satwinder Kaur & Sukhram Singh granted regular bail vide orders dated 15.10.2025, 30.10.2025, 04.11.2025, Annexures P-3 to P-5 respectively. Challan was presented on 31.07.2025, however, charges have not

 CRM-M-66707-2025 (O&M) 2 been framed. In all there are 32 prosecution witnesses. The petitioner is involved in 1 more case. Reliance is placed on the judgment passed by Hon'ble The Supreme Court titled as Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi vs. State of U.P. and others, 2012(2) SCC 382.

3.

The custody certificate along with short reply dated 15/16.10.2025, filed by the learned State counsel is taken on record. As per the same, the petitioner is behind bars for 7 months and 1 day. 4.

Learned State counsel opposes the bail on the ground that there are specific allegations levelled against the petitioner by the co-accused. However, he is unable to controvert the submissions with regard to stage of the case, coaccused having been granted bail and the petitioner being on bail in another case.

5.

Heard.

6.

Hon'ble The Supreme Court in the case of Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi (supra) had held that, "As observed by the High Court, merely on the basis of criminal antecedents, the claim of the second respondent cannot be rejected. In other words, it is the duty of the Court to find out the role of the accused in the case in which he has been charged and other circumstances such as possibility of fleeing away from the jurisdiction of the Court, etc." 7.

                       !"    " #

 "

 $!% &%&'

(    

                     $&                  )     )                 ( (  

 

 CRM-M-66707-2025 (O&M) 3

 &!   *   8.

The petitioner is 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 petitioner will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

(ii) The petitioner will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

(iii) The petitioner will appear before the trial Court on each and every date fixed, unless is exempted by a specific order of Court.

(iv) The petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which, he is an accused, or for commission of which he is suspected of.

(v) The petitioner 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 petitioner shall not in any manner misuse his liberty.

(vii) The petitioner shall furnish his address and mobile number by way of an affidavit to the trial Court and not change the same till conclusion of trial and if for any reasons, he seeks to change either of the aforesaid, it shall be done only with prior information to the learned trial Court.

(viii) The petitioner 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 petitioner.

9.

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 petitioner by this order.

10.

In view of the above, it is clarified that the observations made

 CRM-M-66707-2025 (O&M) 4 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. (AMAN CHAUDHARY) JUDGE 16.01.2026 M.Kamra Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes / No Whether reportable :

Yes / No