BailNow.in News Snacks

Mohali NIA Court Rejects Bail Plea in Narco-Terror Case

Judge Rules No Change in Circumstances Since Earlier Bail Denial

Accused Linked to Heroin Smuggling and Alleged Terror Financing

By Legal Reporter

New Delhi: October 06, 2026:

A special NIA court in Mohali has rejected the second bail plea of Gagandeep Singh, accused in a major narco-terror case involving heroin smuggling and alleged terror financing. The court ruled that no new circumstances justified bail, citing strong prima facie evidence under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).

Case Background

• Accused: Gagandeep Singh alias Gagan Jarmanjit Singh alias Nona, 34, resident of Amritsar.
• Charges: Sections 120-B, 419, 471, 201 of IPC; NDPS Act; Sections 17, 18, 20 of UAPA.
• Custody: Since May 9, 2020.
• Incident: Linked to the seizure of 532 kg heroin concealed in imported rock salt at the Attari border in June 2019.

Court’s Observations

• Judge: Dinesh Kumar Wadhwa, Special NIA Judge, Punjab.
• Reason for Rejection:
  • No substantial change in circumstances since the first bail rejection in August 2024.
  • Punjab and Haryana High Court had already dismissed his appeal in February 2026.
  • Material evidence indicated a prima facie case under UAPA Section 43-D (5), which restricts bail.

NIA Allegations

• Gagandeep was part of a terrorist gang with his brother Ranjeet Singh alias Cheeta and Iqbal Singh alias Shera.
• Alleged links with Hizbul Mujahideen handlers in Pakistan.
• Accused of collecting and selling smuggled heroin and investing proceeds in property.
• Claimed to have invested ₹1.41 crore in land, including ₹1.09 crore in cash, in his wife’s name.

Defence Arguments

• Counsel argued:
  • Gagandeep was not named in the original FIR.
  • No heroin, weapons, or incriminating material recovered from his possession.
  • He has been in custody for over six years with trial delays.
  • Several co-accused have already been granted bail.

Broader Context

• The case highlights the intersection of drug trafficking and terrorism financing in Punjab.
• Authorities allege proceeds from heroin smuggling are funnelled into terrorist activities across borders.
• Courts remain cautious in granting bail under UAPA due to national security concerns.

FAQs

Q1: Why was bail denied again?

Because the court found no new circumstances since the earlier rejection and strong prima facie evidence under UAPA.

Q2: What is UAPA Section 43-D (5)?

It restricts bail if the court finds prima facie evidence of involvement in terrorist activities.

Q3: How much heroin was seized in this case?

532 kg of heroin concealed in imported rock salt at the Attari border in 2019.

Q4: What are the main allegations against Gagandeep Singh?

He allegedly smuggled heroin, invested proceeds in property, and conspired with terrorists linked to Hizbul Mujahideen.

Q5: Has any co-accused received bail?

Yes, several co-accused have been granted bail, but the court held this does not justify bail for Gagandeep.