Punjab-Haryana High Court
Malkiat Singh Alias Malhi vs State Of Punjab on 20 February, 2026
CRM-M-73930-2025 (O&M)
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
118 CRM-M-73930-2025 (O&M)
Date of decision : 20.02.2026
Malkiat Singh @Malhi
..... Petitioner
VERSUS
State of Punjab
..... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA PARTAP SINGH
Present : Mr. Navkiran Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Eklavya Darshi, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.
*****
SURYA PARTAP SINGH, J.
This petition for bail, which is first petition filed by the
petitioner under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023,
has been filed with regard to a case arising out of FIR No.57 dated
27.04.2024, for the commission of offence punishable under Sections 21(c),
25, 27-A and 29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act,
hereinafter being referred to as ‘NDPS Act‘, Police Station Division No.1,
District Jalandhar.
2. The abovementioned FIR came into being at the instance of ‘SI
Sukhraj Singh’, who had reported that on 27.04.2024, when he was heading
a team of police officials, deputed for patrolling duty, at Bhagat Singh
Colony bypass he spotted one Innova Car bearing Registration No.PB08-
BS-2958 heading towards GT road. As per above-named police officer for
the purpose of usual checking, when he signalled the car driver to stop,
1 of 9
::: Downloaded on – 24-02-2026 01:53:35 :::
CRM-M-73930-2025 (O&M)
2
instead of stopping the car, he tried to flee from the spot. According to
above-named police officer, in view of above-mentioned suspicious
behavior the car was intercepted and its driver was apprehending, who on
enquiry disclosed his name as Satnam Singh @Babby. As per report
submitted by the above-named police officer, on the basis of suspicion when
search of the car was conducted, a black colour bag was found therein and
on checking, it was revealed that there were 08 packets of Heroin in the
above-mentioned bag and Rs.21 lacs drug money. On measurement the
weight of each packet came out to be 01 kg. (total 8 kg.).
3. It is the case of the prosecution that pursuant to above-
mentioned recovery, requisite formalities with regard to seizure and sealing
of contraband, lodging of FIR and arrest of accused were performed and
further investigation taken up. According to prosecution during the course of
investigation, when the above-named accused Satnam Singh was
interrogated, he suffered several disclosure statements, one after the other,
and in the above-mentioned disclosure statements he revealed the names of
the persons who were involved in the activities of sale and purchase of
Heroin. As per prosecution, during the course of further investigation when
accused Gurwinder Singh @Mehak and Manjit Singh @Soni were
apprehended, they suffered a disclosure statement, disclosing therein that on
the asking of Vinod Kumar @Lucky, they got supplied the Heroin to the
customers through the present petitioner. As per prosecution, from the
possession of petitioner one car was recovered.
2 of 9
::: Downloaded on – 24-02-2026 01:53:35 :::
CRM-M-73930-2025 (O&M)
3
4. It is the further case of the prosecution that during the course of
further investigation, it came on surface that Daljit Singh used to provide the
truck to supply the Heroin to co-accused Satnam Singh, Hardeep Singh,
Aman Rozi and Khushal Singh and thereafter, they have been arrested in this
case. According to prosecution, from the possession of Hardeep Singh and
Aman Rozi, 40 kg of Heroin was recovered and from the possession of
Kushal Singh, 500 gm of Heroin was recovered.
5. Notice of motion.
6. Mr. Eklavya Darshi, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab appears
on behalf of respondent-State. Hence service of notice upon the State is
hereby dispensed with. The learned State Counsel has filed custody
certificate of the petitioner. The same be taken on record. No formal reply
has been filed by the State. However, the learned State Counsel has orally
opposed the present petition.
7. Heard.
8. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that
the petitioner is innocent having no nexus, whatsoever, with the commission
of crime and that the petitioner was not found in possession of any drug and
he has been nominated by his co-accused Gurwinder Singh @Mehak and
Manjit Singh.
9. The learned counsel for the petitioner has further contended that
the above-said disclosure statement was recorded when the accused
Gurwinder Singh @Mehak and Manjit Singh were in custody and that the
3 of 9
::: Downloaded on – 24-02-2026 01:53:35 :::
CRM-M-73930-2025 (O&M)
4
disclosure statement did not led to discovery of any fact related to this case
and therefore, the same is inadmissible in evidence, being hit by Section-23
of “Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam”.
10. The learned State Counsel has controverted the above-
mentioned arguments. It has been contended by learned State Counsel that in
the present case very huge quantity of contraband has been recovered from
the possession of co-accused, and that the disclosure statement suffered by
the main accused, namely Gurwinder Singh @Mehak and Manjit Singh,
makes it abundantly clear that, the present petitioner and other co-accused
were operating as a gang involved in the trade of narcotic substance, and that
the petitioner was one of the drug dealers, who used to purchase drugs and
sell it to various users. As per learned State Counsel since the quantity of
contraband recovered in this case comes within the ambit of ‘commercial
quantity’, unless the twin conditions enshrined under Section-37 of NDPS
Act are satisfied, the benefit of bail should not be afforded to the petitioner.
11. In support of his arguments, the learned State Counsel has
referred to the principles of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of
India in the case of The State (NCT of Delhi) Narcotics Control Bureau v.
Lokesh Chadha, (2021) 5 SCC 724, wherein it has been held that no person
accused for offences involving a commercial quantity shall be released on
bail, where the public prosecutor opposes the application, unless the Court is
satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty
of such offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail.
12. The record has been perused carefully.
4 of 9
::: Downloaded on – 24-02-2026 01:53:35 :::
CRM-M-73930-2025 (O&M)
5
13. To deal with given fact-situation, the principles of law laid
down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of ‘Vijay Singh Vs.
The State of Haryana‘ 2023 SCC OnlineSC 1235 are relevant. In the
abovementioned case, the petitioner was not present on the spot at the time
of recovery and he was implicated solely on the basis of statement of co-
accused. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the abovementioned case
afforded the benefit of bail to the accused.
14. Similarly, in the case of ‘Surender Kumar Khanna Vs.
Intelligence Officer Directorate of Revenue Intelligence‘ 2018(8) SCC 271,
it has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India that the disclosure
statement of co-accused is inadmissible against another accused, as the
disclosure statement is not a substantive piece of evidence against other
accused.
15. Similar principle has been laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme
Court of India in the case of ‘Preet Kamal Vs. State of Punjab‘, 2018(4)
RCR (Criminal) 938, wherein it has been held that the disclosure statement
of an accused can be used only against the person making the same, and not
against the co-accused.
16. In ‘Tofan Singh Vs. State of Tamil Nadu‘, 2021(4) SCC 1 also,
it has been observed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India that
confessional statement of accused recorded under Section 67 of NDPS Act
cannot be admitted in evidence, as a confession.
17. If the facts and circumstances of the present case are analyzed
in the light of above-mentioned principles of law, it transpires that:-
5 of 9
::: Downloaded on – 24-02-2026 01:53:35 :::
CRM-M-73930-2025 (O&M)
6
(i) that the petitioner is already in custody for a period of more
than one year and one month;
(ii) that the only evidence available against the petitioner is the
disclosure statement of his co-accused and there is a big
question mark with regard to credibility & admissibility of
above-mentioned statement in evidence, as the same was
recorded when the maker of it was in police custody. Since
pursuant to above-mentioned disclosure statement no
discovery of fact took place, prima facie the same appears to
be hit by Section-23 of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam;
(iii) that name of the petitioner does not figure in the FIR;
(iv) that benefit of bail has already been accorded to co-accused;
(v) that nothing is left to be recovered from possession of
petitioner;
(vi) that trial is not likely to be concluded in near future;
(vii) that detention of petitioner in judicial lock up is not likely to
serve any purpose;
(viii) that there is nothing on record to show that if released on
bail, the petitioner may tamper with the evidence or
influence the witnesses; and
(ix) that there is nothing on record to show that if released on
bail, the petitioner will not co-operate/participate in trial.
18. In the present case, the principles of law laid down by the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of “Dataram versus State of Uttar
Pradesh and another“, 2018(2) R.C.R. (Criminal) 131, are also relevant,
wherein it has been observed that “a fundamental postulate of criminal
6 of 9
::: Downloaded on – 24-02-2026 01:53:35 :::
CRM-M-73930-2025 (O&M)
7
jurisprudence is the presumption of innocence, meaning thereby that a
person is believed to be innocent until found guilty. However, there are
instances in our criminal law where a reverse onus has been placed on an
accused with regard to some specific offences but that is another matter and
does not detract from the fundamental postulate in respect of other offences.
Yet another important facet of our criminal jurisprudence is that the grant of
bail is the general rule and putting a person in jail or in a prison or in a
correction home (whichever expression one may wish to use) is an
exception. Unfortunately, some of these basic principles appear to have been
lost sight of with the result that more and more persons are being
incarcerated and for longer periods. This does not do any good to our
criminal jurisprudence or to our society. There is no doubt that the grant or
denial of bail is entirely the discretion of the judge considering a case but
even so, the exercise of judicial discretion has been circumscribed by a large
number of decisions rendered by this Court and by every High Court in the
country. Yet, occasionally there is a necessity to introspect whether denying
bail to an accused person is the right thing to do on the facts and in the
circumstances of a case”.
19. The principles laid down by the Hon’ble the Supreme Court of
India in the case of ‘Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of
Investigation and Another‘, (2022) 10 SCC 51, are also relevant in this case.
In the abovementioned case, it has been observed that “the rate of conviction
in criminal cases in India is abysmally low. It appears to us that this factor
weighs on the mind of the Court while deciding the bail applications in a
7 of 9
::: Downloaded on – 24-02-2026 01:53:35 :::
CRM-M-73930-2025 (O&M)
8
negative sense. Courts tend to think that the possibility of a conviction being
nearer to rarity, bail applications will have to be decided strictly, contrary to
legal principles. We cannot mix up consideration of a bail application, which
is not punitive in nature with that of a possible adjudication by way of trial.
On the contrary, an ultimate acquittal with continued custody would be a
case of grave injustice”.
20. Recently, in the case of ‘Tapas Kumar Palit Vs. State of
Chhattisgarh’, 2025 SCC Online SC 322, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of
India has observed that “if an accused is to get a final verdict after
incarceration of six to seven years in jail as an undertrial prisoner, then,
definitely, it could be said that his right to have a speedy trial under Article
21 of the Constitution has been infringed”. It has also been observed by the
Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the abovementioned case that “delays are
bad for the accused and extremely bad for the victims, for Indian society and
for the credibility of our justice system, which is valued. Judges are the
masters of their Courtrooms and the Criminal Procedure Code provides
many tools for the Judges to use in order to ensure that cases proceed
efficiently”.
21. To elucidate further, this Court is conscious of the basic and
fundamental principle of law that right to speedy trial is a part of reasonable,
fair and just procedure enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of
India. This constitutional right cannot be denied to the accused as mandated
by Hon’ble Apex court in “Balwinder Singh versus State of Punjab and
Another“, 2024 SCC Online SC 4354.
8 of 9
::: Downloaded on – 24-02-2026 01:53:35 :::
CRM-M-73930-2025 (O&M)
9
22. If the cumulative effect of all the abovementioned factors,
involved in the instant case, is taken into consideration, it leads to a
conclusion that the petitioner is entitled for the benefit of bail, and that the
present petition deserves to be allowed.
23. Accordingly, without commenting anything on the merits of the
case, the present petition is hereby allowed. The petitioner is hereby ordered
to be released on bail on furnishing personal bond and surety bond(s) to the
satisfaction of learned trial Court. However the abovementioned concession
shall be subject to following conditions:-
(i) that the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any
inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with
the facts of the case, so as to dissuade him to disclose such facts
to the Court or to any other authority.
(ii) that the petitioner shall at the time of execution of bond, furnish
the address to the Court concerned and shall notify the change
in address to the trial Court, till the final decision of the trial;
and
(iii) that the petitioner shall not leave India without prior permission
of the trial Court.
(SURYA PARTAP SINGH)
JUDGE
20.02.2026
Gaurav Thakur
Whether speaking / reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
9 of 9
::: Downloaded on - 24-02-2026 01:53:35 :::
