Arshdeep Singh Alias Kela v. State Of Punjab

CRM-M-69239-2025 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-69239-2025 Date of Decision: 12.12.2025 ARSHDEEP SINGH @ KELA ... PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB ... RESPONDENT CORAM :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present:- Mr. Harpreet S.Rakhra, Advocate for the petitioner. H.S. Grewal, J.(Oral) 1.

This petition has been filed for grant of regular bail under Section 483 of BNSS in case FIR No. 81 dated 06.06.2025 under Sections 21-B/27-A/61/85 of NDPS (later on added Section 29 of NDPS Act) registered at Police Station Sultanwind, District Amritsar. 2.

As per the allegations, 10 grams of heroin along with ₹600/- alleged drug money was recovered from the possession of the petitioner. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and the alleged recovery of 10 grams of heroin and ₹600/- drug money is a planted one. He further submits that the petitioner has been in custody since 06.06.2025. 4.

Notice of motion.

5.

Mr. Parneet Singh Pandher, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and vehemently opposes the prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner was found in conscious possession of the alleged contraband. He has Renu Rawat 2025.12.12 16.14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-69239-2025 -2filed the custody certificate of the petitioner in Court today, and the same is taken on record. As per the custody certificate, the petitioner is in custody for the last 06 months and 02 days. He further submits that the petitioner is involved in several cases, including another case under the NDPS Act, in which he is already on bail. 6.

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

7.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case that the petitioner is in custody for the last 06 months and 02 days, the trial would take considerable time to conclude; this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose would be served for further incarceration of the petitioner. Moreover, bail is rule and jail is exception. Hence, this Court deems it appropriate to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner during the pendency of the trial. 8.

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 bonds, surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned. 9.

It is clarified that if on bail so granted through the instant order, the petitioner is found indulging in any other criminal case it shall be open to the State to seek cancellation of his bail.

10.

Pending applications, if any, shall also be disposed of. (H.S.GREWAL) 12.12.2025 JUDGE renu Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No Renu Rawat 2025.12.12 16.14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document