RAJESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition has been filed under Sec. 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') by the petitioner seeking grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No. 109 dtd. 8/5/2025 registered under Ss. 21(c), 23, 25 and 27(a) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985 (for short 'NDPS Act') and Sec. 25(8) of Arms Act, 1959 (Sec. 29 of NDPS Act added later on) at Police Station City Tarn Taran, District Tarn Taran.

(2.) As per the allegations, on 8/5/2025, the accused Lovepreet Singh @ Love and Jagroop Singh were apprehended on the basis of a secret information. They were interrogated. The accused Lovepreet Singh suffered a disclosure statement admitting his involvement with the drug paddlers from Pakistan and got recovered 5kg and 23/125 grams of heroin and drug money to the tune of Rs.7,20,000.00 and 07 illicit pistols of 30 bore along with 11 magazines and 40 live cartridges was got effected. The accused Lovepreet Singh suffered another disclosure statement on 9/5/2025 on the basis of which the co-accused Sahilpreet Singh @ Sunny and Ajay Kumar @ Ajay were nominated as additional accused. On the basis of their disclosure statement, accused Jobanpreet Singh was nominated and arrested. Accused Lovepreet Singh suffered another disclosure statement on 13/5/2025 on the basis of which the present petitioner and co-accused Pargat Singh were nominated. The petitioner was arrested on the same day. One MG Hector car, drug money of Rs.5,18,400.00 and one laptop of Apple make were recovered from him. Investigation now stands completed and the petitioner along with the co-accused is facing trial for commission of the aforementioned offences.

(3.) It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case on the basis of disclosure statement of the co-accused which cannot be considered to be admissible in evidence. A false recovery has been planted upon him. He is in custody for a period of six months and twenty-two days. No contraband has been recovered from him. The alleged recovery of money cannot be stated to be recovery of any drug money. He is running a travel agency and has been depositing his income tax returns which show that he has steady income. Trial will take considerable time to conclude as even charges have not been framed. He has clean antecedents. His continued detention would not serve any useful purpose. It is, thus, argued that the petition deserves to be allowed.