Judgment Intelligence
Bail GrantedCharanjit Singh v. State of Punjab
Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 10691 of 2026
- Court
- Supreme Court of India
- Date of Decision
- 9 October 2026
- Bench
- Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh
- Relevant Acts & Sections
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Section 15
Final Outcome
Special leave petition disposed of: interim protection of 01.06.2026 made absolute, subject to cooperation with the investigation and surrender of any passport (paras 7, 8 and 10).
Key holdings
- Interim protection was made absolute after the petitioner joined the investigation (paras 6-7).
- The case against him rests on his registered ownership of the vehicle carrying 120 kg of poppy husk (para 3).
- He must keep cooperating and report when called by the Investigating Authority (first para 8).
- Any passport is to be surrendered before the Trial Court (second para 8).
Brief Facts
The Punjab and Haryana High Court, on 18.05.2026, refused the petitioner anticipatory bail in FIR No. 161 of 2025, Police Station Sadar Kapurthala, under Section 15 of the NDPS Act (para 1). The Supreme Court granted him interim protection on 01.06.2026 (para 2). The allegation is that he is the registered owner of the vehicle used to transport 120 kg of poppy husk illegally (para 3). He contended that he is not named in the FIR, that nothing was recovered from his conscious possession, and that he had handed the vehicle to a friend who may have used it (para 4). The State strongly opposed bail (para 5).
Court's Findings
The Court noted that it was undisputed that the petitioner had joined the investigation after the interim protection (para 6). After hearing both sides and keeping in view the totality of circumstances, it held that the interim order of 01.06.2026 deserved to be made absolute (para 7). The protection is subject to his continued cooperation with the investigation and to reporting whenever the Investigating Authority calls him (first para 8), and he must surrender any passport before the Trial Court (second para 8). The order does not rule on his contentions about the FIR or conscious possession, and gives no further reasons.
Legal Principle
Where an accused under the NDPS Act is implicated as the registered owner of the vehicle and has joined the investigation under interim protection, the Supreme Court may, on the totality of circumstances, make that protection absolute with conditions of cooperation and passport surrender (paras 3, 6-8).
