DAVINDER SINGH ALIAS GAGGI v. STATE OF PUNJAB
Court: High Court of Punjab and Haryana
Bench: MR. JUSTICE SURYA PARTAP SINGH
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Punjab and Haryana judgment dated 2026-04-24. DAVINDER SINGH ALIAS GAGGI v. STATE OF PUNJAB. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA ATIN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA ATIN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARHCHANDIGARH 215 CRM-M-16478-2026 (O&M) (O&M) Date of decision : 24. 04. 2026. 2026 Davinder Singh @GaggiDavinder Singh @Gaggi ..... Petitioner Petitioner VERSUSVERSUS State of PunjabPunjab ..... Respondent..... Respondent [ CORAM:CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA PARTAP SINGHSURYA PARTAP SINGH Present : Mr. Parminder Singh SekhonParminder Singh Sekhon, Senior Advocate with Ms. Sweedel Goyal, AdvocateMs. Sweedel Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Rohit Bansal, Sr. DAG PunjabMr. Rohit Bansal, Sr. DAG Punjab. ********** SURYA PARTAP SINGHSURYA PARTAP SINGH, J. This petition for bail is the firstfirst petition, filed by the petitioner petitioner under Section 483 ofunder Section 483 of ‘the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha SanhitaBharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023’.
It has been filedbeen filed with regard to a case arising out ofwith regard to a case arising out of FIR No. 88 dated 22. 11. 2024 22. 11. 2024, for the commission of offor the commission of offence punishable under Sectionfence punishable under Sections 15 and 21 15 and 21 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, hereinafter being referredNarcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, hereinafter being referredNarcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, hereinafter being referredNarcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, hereinafter being referred to as ‘NDPS Act’to as ‘NDPS Act’, Police Station Sherpur, District, District Sangrur. 2. The abovementioned FIR came into being at the instance ofThe abovementioned FIR came into being at the instance ofThe abovementioned FIR came into being at the instance of ‘ASI BalwindeBalwinder Singh’, who had reported thatreported that on 22. 11.
2024, when he was he was leading a team of police officials,leading a team of police officials, on the basis of a tipon the basis of a tip-off given by a reliableoff given by a reliable source, he visited the house ofsource, he visited the house of Davinder Singh @Goggi (the petitionerDavinder Singh @Goggi (the petitionerDavinder Singh @Goggi (the petitioner herein). According to above. According to above-named police officer, when the police party wasnamed police officer, when the police party wasnamed police officer, when the police party was approaching the house of petitioner, outside his house, there was a car,approaching the house of petitioner, outside his house, there was a car,approaching the house of petitioner, outside his house, there was a car,approaching the house of petitioner, outside his house, there was a car, 2026. 04.
24 18:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document wherein the petitioner was sitting along with ‘Hardeep Singh’wherein the petitioner was sitting along with ‘Hardeep Singh’wherein the petitioner was sitting along with ‘Hardeep Singh’, and when the, and when the search of abovementioned car was condusearch of abovementioned car was condusearch of abovementioned car was conducted, 10 kg of poppy husk and 20 10 kg of poppy husk and 20 gms of Heroingms of Heroin along with drug money of Rs. 4,15,000/along with drug money of Rs. 4,15,000/- were recovered. 3.
It is the case of the prosecution that pursuant to recovery ofIt is the case of the prosecution that pursuant to recovery ofIt is the case of the prosecution that pursuant to recovery of abovementioned contraband, necessary formalities with regard to seizure &abovementioned contraband, necessary formalities with regard to seizure &abovementioned contraband, necessary formalities with regard to seizure &abovementioned contraband, necessary formalities with regard to seizure & sealing of csealing of contraband, lodging of FIR, and formal arrest of the accused wereontraband, lodging of FIR, and formal arrest of the accused wereontraband, lodging of FIR, and formal arrest of the accused were completed, and further investigation taken up. completed, and further investigation taken up. completed, and further investigation taken up.
According to prosecution, According to prosecution, when the petitioner was interrogated, he suffered a disclosure statement andwhen the petitioner was interrogated, he suffered a disclosure statement andwhen the petitioner was interrogated, he suffered a disclosure statement andwhen the petitioner was interrogated, he suffered a disclosure statement and got recovered 01 kg of Heroin from his pogot recovered 01 kg of Heroin from his pogot recovered 01 kg of Heroin from his possession. 4. Notice of motion. 5. Mr. Mr. Rohit Rohit Bansal, Bansal, Sr. Sr. DAG DAG Punjab Punjab appears appears on on behalf behalf of of respondentrespondent-State. Hence service of notice upon the State is hereby dispensedState. Hence service of notice upon the State is hereby dispensedState. Hence service of notice upon the State is hereby dispensed with.
TheTheTheThe learned learned learned learned State State State State Counsel Counsel Counsel Counsel has has has has filed filed filed filed custody custody custody custody certificate certificate certificate certificate of of of of the the the the petitioner. The sampetitioner. The same be taken on record. No formal reply has been filed byo formal reply has been filed by the State. However,. However, the learned State Counsel has orally opposethe learned State Counsel has orally opposed the present the present petition. 6. Heard. 7.
ItIt has has been been contended contended by by learned learned Senior Counselounsel for for the the petitioner that the petitionerpetitioner that the petitioner has already suffered incarcerationhas already suffered incarceration for almost for almost one year and five months, and that the most significant lapse committed byone year and five months, and that the most significant lapse committed byone year and five months, and that the most significant lapse committed byone year and five months, and that the most significant lapse committed by the Investigating Officerthe Investigating Officer in the present case is thatin the present case is that, that as per prosecution, that as per prosecution story, the recovery of 01 kg of Herointhe recovery of 01 kg of Herointhe recovery of 01 kg of Heroin had taken place on the basis ofn the basis of informationinformation provided by the petitioner, but at the time of recovery, neitherprovided by the petitioner, but at the time of recovery, neitherprovided by the petitioner, but at the time of recovery, neither 2026.
04. 24 18:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document any person of the locality was joined, nor any senior officer was informedany person of the locality was joined, nor any senior officer was informedany person of the locality was joined, nor any senior officer was informedany person of the locality was joined, nor any senior officer was informed about the same. It has also been contended by learnedabout the same. It has also been contended by learnedabout the same.
It has also been contended by learned Senior Counsel for the for the petitioner tpetitioner that the abovementioned lapse on the part of Investigating Officerhat the abovementioned lapse on the part of Investigating Officerhat the abovementioned lapse on the part of Investigating Officer shatters the very credibility of the claim of the prosecutionthe very credibility of the claim of the prosecutionthe very credibility of the claim of the prosecution, qua the fact that qua the fact that thethethethe petitioner petitioner petitioner petitioner was was was was found found found found in in in in possession possession possession possession of of of of ‘commercial ‘commercial ‘commercial ‘commercial quantity’ quantity’ quantity’ quantity’ of of of of contraband. contraband. 8. TheTheThe learned learned learned State State State Counsel Counsel Counsel has has has controverted controverted controverted the the the abovementioned arguments. abovementioned arguments.
It has been contended by learned State CounselIt has been contended by learned State CounselIt has been contended by learned State Counsel that in the present case, although at the first instance the quantity ofthat in the present case, although at the first instance the quantity ofthat in the present case, although at the first instance the quantity ofthat in the present case, although at the first instance the quantity of recovered contraband was not the ‘commercial quantity’recovered contraband was not the ‘commercial quantity’recovered contraband was not the ‘commercial quantity’, yet, subsequentlybsequently on the basis of information provided by the petitioneron the basis of information provided by the petitioneron the basis of information provided by the petitioner, from his house 01 kg from his house 01 kg of ‘HeroinHeroin’ was recovered.
According to State Counsel, theAccording to State Counsel, the abovementioned abovementioned quantity ofquantity of ‘Heroin’ comes within the ambit of ‘commercial quantity’, andcomes within the ambit of ‘commercial quantity’, andcomes within the ambit of ‘commercial quantity’, and therefore, unless ththerefore, unless the twin conditions enshrined under Sectione twin conditions enshrined under Section-37 of NDPS37 of NDPS Act are satisfied, the benefit of bail should not be accorded to the petitioner. Act are satisfied, the benefit of bail should not be accorded to the petitioner. Act are satisfied, the benefit of bail should not be accorded to the petitioner. Act are satisfied, the benefit of bail should not be accorded to the petitioner. 9. The record has been perused carefully. The record has been perused carefully. 10.
In the present case, it is relevant to note here that right from theIn the present case, it is relevant to note here that right from theIn the present case, it is relevant to note here that right from the very beginning, there are very specific and categorical allegations against thevery beginning, there are very specific and categorical allegations against thevery beginning, there are very specific and categorical allegations against thevery beginning, there are very specific and categorical allegations against the petitioner thatpetitioner that on the basis of secret information, when he was nabbedon the basis of secret information, when he was nabbed by the by the police party, he was found inpolice party, he was found in possession of 10 kg of poppy husk and 20 gmpossession of 10 kg of poppy husk and 20 gmpossession of 10 kg of poppy husk and 20 gm of Heroin. of Heroin. 11.
The prosecution in the present case has very categorically comeThe prosecution in the present case has very categorically comeThe prosecution in the present case has very categorically come forward with a plea that during the cforward with a plea that during the cforward with a plea that during the course of investigation, when the, when the 2026. 04. 24 18:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document petitioner was interrogated, he suffered a disclosure statempetitioner was interrogated, he suffered a disclosure statempetitioner was interrogated, he suffered a disclosure statement pursuant to pursuant to which 01 kg of Heroin has been recovered. Since the disclosure statementwhich 01 kg of Heroin has been recovered. Since the disclosure statementwhich 01 kg of Heroin has been recovered. Since the disclosure statementwhich 01 kg of Heroin has been recovered.
Since the disclosure statement suffered by the petitioner has ledsuffered by the petitioner has led to the recovery of contrabandto the recovery of contraband, prima facie prima facie thethethethe abovementioned abovementioned abovementioned abovementioned disclosure disclosure disclosure disclosure statement statement statement statement seems seems seems seems to to to to be be be be admissible admissible admissible admissible in in in in evidence. evidence. 12. Otherwise also, it shall not be out of place to mention here thatOtherwise also, it shall not be out of place to mention here thatOtherwise also, it shall not be out of place to mention here that the petitioner does not have clean antecedents. Earlier also, the petitioner hasthe petitioner does not have clean antecedents. Earlier also, the petitioner hasthe petitioner does not have clean antecedents. Earlier also, the petitioner hasthe petitioner does not have clean antecedents.
Earlier also, the petitioner has been prosecuted for seven different offences and out of those seven offences,been prosecuted for seven different offences and out of those seven offences,been prosecuted for seven different offences and out of those seven offences,been prosecuted for seven different offences and out of those seven offences, one was under NDPS Act. one was under NDPS Act. 13. Since in the present case thethe quantity of recovered contraband contraband comes within the ambit of ‘commercial quantity’, rigors of Sectioncomes within the ambit of ‘commercial quantity’, rigors of Sectioncomes within the ambit of ‘commercial quantity’, rigors of Section-37 of37 of NDPSNDPS Act Act areare applicable applicable and and therefore, therefore, without without satisfying satisfying the the twin twin conditions enshrined under Sectionconditions enshrined under Section-37 of NDPS Act, the37 of NDPS Act, the petitioner cannot petitioner cannot be enlarged on bail.
The contents of the record show that there is nothing onbe enlarged on bail. The contents of the record show that there is nothing onbe enlarged on bail. The contents of the record show that there is nothing onbe enlarged on bail. The contents of the record show that there is nothing on record to lead to a conclusion that twin conditionsrecord to lead to a conclusion that twin conditionsrecord to lead to a conclusion that twin conditions prescribed under Section under Section- 37 of NDPS Act stands complied with in the present case. 37 of NDPS Act stands complied with in the present case. 37 of NDPS Act stands complied with in the present case. 14.
Taking into considerationrationration the the the cumulative cumulative cumulative effect effect effect of of of all all all the the the abovementioned factors, it is hereby held that at this stage the petitioner isabovementioned factors, it is hereby held that at this stage the petitioner isabovementioned factors, it is hereby held that at this stage the petitioner isabovementioned factors, it is hereby held that at this stage the petitioner is not entitled for the benefit of bail. not entitled for the benefit of bail. 15. As a sequel to abovementioned observations, it is hereby heldAs a sequel to abovementioned observations, it is hereby heldAs a sequel to abovementioned observations, it is hereby held that being devoid of meritbeing devoid of merit, the present petitionpresent petition deserves dismissal. Hence, Hence, the same is herebyis hereby dismissed, accordingly, accordingly. 2026. 04. 24 18:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 16.
However, it is clarified that the abovementioned observationsit is clarified that the abovementioned observationsit is clarified that the abovementioned observations shall not have anyshall not have any bearing upon the merits of the case. bearing upon the merits of the case. 17. PendingPending miscellaneous miscellaneous application(s), application(s), if if any, any, also also stand(s) stand(s) disposed of, accordingly. disposed of, accordingly. (SURYA PARTAP SINGH)) JUDGE 24. 04. 2022026 Gaurav ThakurGaurav Thakur Whether speaking / reasonedWhether speaking / reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No 2026. 04. 24 18:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Source: High Court of Punjab and Haryana. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.