SURJEET SINGH vs STATE OF HARYANA

AMIT RANA 2026.05.21 15:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judgement/order CRM M-26352-2026 (O&M) 2 offence under Section 27-A of the NDPS Act. Learned counsel submits that except the disclosure statements suffered by the co-accused, the police could not collect any other incriminating evidence against the petitioner to connect him with the crime in any manner. Apart from that, even there was no call detail record to show that the petitioner had talked to them on phone, nor any money trail could be found. He further contends that the petitioner was arrested in the present case on 20.06.2025 and the challan has already been presented against him. Even the main accused, who were apprehended at the spot with the alleged recovery of 5.34 grams of heroin have already been granted the concession of bail vide order dated 02.07.2025 (Annexure P-3) passed by the Special Court, Fatehabad. He further contends that, in fact, in the past also, the petitioner was involved in other cases under the NDPS Act, and due to pendency of other cases, he was arrayed as an accused in the present case also. 3. On the other hand, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the submissions