Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: interim regular bail in Daljeet Singh Alias Jeeta vs State Of Punjab on 3 February, 2026Matching Fragments
CRM-M-68153- 68153-2025 cannot be fastened upon the petitioner. Learned counsel has further argued that, earlier, vide order dated 22.01.2026, the petitioner was granted concession of interim regular bail for a period of 03 days, and after availing the said concession, the petitioner has surrendered back to the custody, in time, i.e., on 01.02.2026 (brought forth by the learned counsel for the petitioner, in the Court today). Learned counsel has further argued that investigation in this case is complete and challan has been presented on 06.03.2025 and out of total 15 prosecution witnesses, none has been examined and 04 have been given up till date. Learned counsel has further iterated that the petitioner has suffered incarceration for more than 01 year. Thus, regular bail is prayed for.
4. Learned State counsel has opposed the present petition by arguing that the allegations raised against the petitioner are serious in nature and, thus, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of the regular bail. Learned State counsel has further submitted that the instant bail plea is barred by the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, and thus, the same ought to be dismissed. Learned State counsel has not controverted the factum of petitioner having surrendered back to the custody in time after availing concession of interim regular bail for a period of 03 days granted by this Court. Learned State counsel seeks to place on record custody certificate dated 02.02.2026, in the Court today, which is taken on record.
CRM-M-68153- 68153-2025 granted interim regular bail for 03 days. Concededly, after availing the said concession, the petitioner has surrendered back to the custody on 01.02.2026, which is decipherable from the order dated 01.02.2026 passed by the JMIC, Ludhiana brought forth by learned counsel for the petitioner, in the Court today. The rival contentions raised at Bar give rise to debatable issues, which shall be ratiocinated upon during the course of trial. This Court does not deem it appropriate to delve deep into these rival contentions, at this stage, lest it may prejudice the trial. Nothing tangible has been brought forward to indicate the likelihood of the petitioner absconding from the process of justice or interfering with the prosecution evidence.