Order 11

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: IA No. 04/2026 SC 7172/2025
PS CRIME BRANCH
FIR NO. 164/2025
STATE V/S SHARM SINGH
28.03.2026
Present: Sh. Pankaj Bhatia, Ld. Addl. PP for the State.
Ld. counsel for the applicant/ accused/
1. This is an application for grant of regular bail filed on
behalf of applicant/ accused Sharm Singh in FIR NO.164/2025, U/S
21/22/25/29 NDPS Act registered at PS Crime Branch.
1.2 Arguments on the bail application already heard. Record
perused.
ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF ACCUSED/APPLICANT
2. Ld. counsel for the applicant/ accused submits that the
applicant is in JC since 04.10.2025. He further submits that nothing was
recovered from the possession of applicant and there was no transcript
between the present applicant and co-accused Satpal Singh. He further
submits that the investigation in the present matter is complete and the
charge sheet has already been filed. The applicant has clean
antecedents and not involved in any NDPS case and only one
involvement in Arms case in Punjab. He lastly submits that the applicant
has been falsely implicated in the present case and he belongs to very
poor family.
ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF STATE
3. On the other hand, Ld. Addl. PP for the State submits that
during interrogation present applicant admits his involvement in drug
trafficking and money transfer for the last 6-7 years. He further submits
-- 1 of 3 --
:: 2 ::
that 401 grams of ‘Heroin’ and 45 gram of MDMA was recovered from
the co-accused Satpal, which is commercial in nature. There is
whatsapp and Instagram connectivity between accused Sharm Singh and
co-accused Satpal Singh. Further, the applicant is involved in one case
of NDPS Act and one case of robbery and arms supply at Punjab. He
further submits that if the present applicant is released on bail, he may
indulge in similar kind of offence or influence the witnesses. On these
grounds, the bail is strongly opposed.
3.2 Submissions heard. Record perused.
FINDINGS/CONCLUSION
4. As a matter of fact, there are three evidences against the
accused i.e. disclosure statement of co-accused, financial transactions
and CDR connectivity. The evidence against the present applicant qua
the disclosure statement of accused Satpal is not admissible within the
purview of law. The version of prosecution qua CDR connectivity is not
admissible evidence against the accused. Moreover, no call history was
placed on record by prosecution to prove the said fact, however, there is
a version of prosecution that the CDRs were being deleted time to time.
However, there is financial transactions between the present applicant
and the co-accused in lakhs and no justifiable reason has been given for
the said transactions. The applicant does not have clean antecedent as
he is involved in one more case of NDPS Act, which is registered at
Punjab. Prima-facie it appears that there is a nexus of circulating the
drugs in the society which causes harm to the society. Considering the
fact that the applicant is having criminal history, multiple financial
-- 2 of 3 --
:: 3 ::
transactions in lakhs with the co-accused and there is no justification
regarding the same, this court is not inclined to grant bail to the
applicant/ accused Sharm Singh. The present bail application is
accordingly dismissed.
4.2 Nothing in this order shall tantamount to an expression of
opinion on the merits of the case during trial.
4.3 Pursuant to directions issued by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India
in SMWP (Criminal) No. 4/2021 titled as In Re Policy Strategy for Grant
of Bail as well as in compliance of judgment titled as Ajay Verma Vs.
State, copy of this order be sent to Jail Superintendent through e-mail.
Copy of this order be given dasti as prayed for.
Harvinder Singh Johal
Spl. Judge(NDPS)/ASJ
North Distt., Rohini Courts,
Delhi/ 28.03.2026 (r)
-- 3 of 3 --