Punjab & Haryana High Court
Kuldeep Singh v. State of Punjab
CRM-M/37710/2026
- Decision date
- 2026-08-26
- Text availability
- Full text
- Judges
- Sanjay Vashisth
Source: Indian High Court Judgments, AWS Open Data (CC BY 4.0) ↗
Connected provisions and cases
No further provision or case links are recorded.
Judgment text
221-2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-37710-2026 DECIDED ON: 26.08.2026 KULDEEP SINGH .....PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB .....RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH. Present: Mr. Randeep Singh Waraich (Rana), Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Gurpartap Singh, AAG, Punjab. SANJAY VASHISTH, J (ORAL) 1. Present 2nd petition under Section 483 Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (U/s 439 Cr.P.C.) for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, in case, FIR No.134 dated 02.06.2025, Under Sections 20, 22, 27, 29/61/85 of the NDPS Act, 1985, Section 223 (B) of BNS, 2023 (188 of IPC, 1860), Section 52-A of Prison Act, 1894 and Section 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, registered at Police Station City Rupnagar, District Rupnagar. 2. First bail petition, i.e. CRM-M-62109-2025, filed by the petitioner-Kuldeep Singh, was dismissed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, vide a detailed order dated 24.02.2026 (Annexure P-44). In the said order, it was categorically recorded that the contraband recovered from the possession of the petitioner falls within the ambit of commercial quantity. It was also observed that, being a member of the disciplined force, petitioner was not expected to indulge in any activity in violation LAVISHA 2026.08.27 15:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh CRM-M-37710-2026 -2-
of law or to act in a manner undermining the trust reposed in him by the general public. 3. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, present second petition seeking regular bail filed by the petitioner cannot be entertained at such an early stage, particularly when the earlier bail petition was dismissed only about six months ago, and there is no substantial change in circumstances warranting reconsideration of the prayer for bail. 4. Accordingly, present petition is dismissed, at this stage. (SANJAY VASHISTH) 26.08.2026 JUDGE Lavisha Whetherspeaking/reasoned Yes/No Whetherreportable Yes/No LAVISHA 2026.08.27 15:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh