In a stern order delivered on September 22, 2025, the Punjab and Haryana High Court refused anticipatory bail to one Robert Masih, accused of being part of a cross-border drug smuggling racket that allegedly used drones to ferry heroin from Pakistan into Indian territory. The case, which has raised serious concerns over national security and the growing use of drones in illegal trade, was heard by Justice Rupinderjit Chahal.
Background
The case stems from FIR No. 53, dated September 24, 2024, registered at Police Station Narot Jaimal Singh in Pathankot under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985. Later, Section 29 was also added to the charges.
The petitioner, Robert Masih, came under the scanner after the interrogation of a co-accused, Harjit Singh alias Jeeta. Harjit, already in custody in a separate case involving the Official Secrets Act and NDPS Act, reportedly told the police that drugs were being smuggled into India via drones from Pakistan, and that Robert Masih was the financier behind the operation.
"The consignment was supplied from Pakistan through drone," the police recorded in its investigation report, "and Robert Masih used to pay money for the same."
Robert was not originally named in the FIR but was later implicated based on Harjit’s disclosure statement. The defence argued that this was a weak and uncorroborated basis for his arrest.
Court's Observations
Justice Chahal, after hearing both sides, observed that the allegations were "serious in nature," especially given that the case involves international smuggling using drones - a growing threat that not only endangers the nation’s security but also contributes to the drug menace among Indian youth.
"The petitioner is alleged to be the mastermind of the drug supply chain from Pakistan," the Court noted. "He is found to be a member of the drug nexus who smuggled heroin from Pakistan by using drones."
The State counsel opposed the bail plea, emphasizing that a commercial quantity of heroin had already been recovered from the co-accused. He asserted that Robert’s custodial interrogation was essential to uncover the larger network, including drones, SIM cards, and bank accounts used in the operation. The prosecution also informed the Court that Robert had been declared a proclaimed offender on May 19, 2025, and was involved in multiple other criminal cases - labeling him a "habitual offender."
Justice Chahal took note of these arguments and cited the Supreme Court’s ruling in State v. Anil Sharma (1997) 7 SCC 187, which held that custodial interrogation is more effective for eliciting crucial information than questioning an accused protected by pre-arrest bail.
"The Court has to presume," the bench remarked, "that responsible police officers would conduct themselves in a responsible manner and that those entrusted with the task of disinterring offences would not conduct themselves as offenders."
Court’s Decision
Balancing the individual’s liberty against the societal need for effective investigation, the Court found "no merit" in Robert Masih’s anticipatory bail plea. Justice Chahal observed that denying custody would “leave many loose ends, which is not desired” in such a grave matter.
Consequently, the petition under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, was dismissed. The Court clarified that its observations were limited to the bail question and should not influence the ongoing investigation or trial.
With this order, the Court reinforced its zero-tolerance stance toward cross-border drug trafficking operations that exploit modern technology to evade law enforcement.
Case Title: Robert Masih vs. State of Punjab
Case Number: CRM-M-20005 of 2025
Date of Decision: 22 September 2025
Petitioner's Counsel: Mr. Ritesh Pandey, Advocate
Respondent’s Counsel: Mr. Ravinder Singh, Deputy Advocate General (DAG), Punjab