CRM-M-16866 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA 216 HARJIT SINGH STATE OF PUNJAB CORAM:- HON'BLE Present:- M for the petitioner. Mr. Amrit Pal Singh Gill, DAG, Punjab RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL, J. (ORAL) 1. Through the instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNSS”), the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychot (Section 29 of the NDPS Act added later on) at Police Station Civil Line Batala, District Gurdaspur (Annexure P 2. On 482 of the BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.25 dated 22.01.2026 registered under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances 16866-2026 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM Date of decision: HARJIT SINGH Versus PUNJAB HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Mr. Ritesh Pandey, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Amrit Pal Singh Gill, DAG, Punjab ***** RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL, J. (ORAL) Through the instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNSS”), the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No.25 dated 22.01.2026 registered under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychot (Section 29 of the NDPS Act added later on) at Police Station Civil Line Batala, District Gurdaspur (Annexure P-1). On 01.04.2026, the following order “Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.25 dated 22.01.2026 registered under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-16866-2026 Date of decision: 18.04.2026 ….Petitioner ....Respondent MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Mr. Amrit Pal Singh Gill, DAG, Punjab. Through the instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNSS”), the petitioner FIR No.25 dated 22.01.2026 registered under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (Section 29 of the NDPS Act added later on) at Police Station Civil Line following order was passed by this Court: - Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.25 dated 22.01.2026 registered under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances ….Petitioner ....Respondent Through the instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNSS”), the petitioner FIR No.25 dated 22.01.2026 registered under ropic Substances Act, 1985 (Section 29 of the NDPS Act added later on) at Police Station Civil Line Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.25 dated 22.01.2026 registered under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances GURPREET 2026.04.18 18:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-16866 Act, 1985 (Section Station Civil Line Batala, District Gurdaspur (Annexure P 22.01.2026, Inspector Manohar Singh along with fellow police officials was on a patrolling duty apprehended one Karan Kumar @ Noni who was found in conscious possession of 8.31 grams of Heroin. Initially, the FIR in question was registered against the said co petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further contends that the petitioner was neither present at the spot, nor was named in the FIR and he has no concern with the said incident. He further contends that the petitioner has been no statement made by co from the disclosure statement, there is no other evidence to connect the petitioner with the offence in question and it is a trite law that dis custodial interrogation is not recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. petitioner is ready and willing to join when called upon to do so by the investigating agency. status report in the matter and while referring to the status report, has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory b submitting that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature. investigation within a week from today and would appear as and when required by the Investigating Officer and cooperate with the Investigating Agency. In the event of arrest, he shall be admitted to inter 16866-2026 2 Act, 1985 (Section 29 of the NDPS Act added later on) at Police Station Civil Line Batala, District Gurdaspur (Annexure P Brief facts as per the prosecution case are that on 22.01.2026, Inspector Manohar Singh along with fellow police officials was on a patrolling duty apprehended one Karan Kumar @ Noni who was found in conscious possession of 8.31 grams of Heroin. Initially, the FIR in question was registered against the said co Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further contends that the petitioner was neither present at the spot, nor was named in the FIR and he has no concern with the said incident. He further contends that the petitioner has been nominated as an accused only on the basis of the disclosure statement made by co-accused Karan Kumar @ Noni. Apart from the disclosure statement, there is no other evidence to connect the petitioner with the offence in question and it is a trite law that disclosure statement of the co custodial interrogation is not recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to join when called upon to do so by the investigating agency. On the other hand, learned State counsel has filed the status report in the matter and while referring to the status report, has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory b submitting that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature. Adjourned to 18.04.2026. In the meantime, the petitioner is directed to join investigation within a week from today and would appear as and when required by the Investigating Officer and cooperate with the Investigating Agency. In the event of arrest, he shall be admitted to interim bail on furnishing of bail/surety bonds to the 29 of the NDPS Act added later on) at Police Station Civil Line Batala, District Gurdaspur (Annexure P-1). Brief facts as per the prosecution case are that on 22.01.2026, Inspector Manohar Singh along with fellow police officials was on a patrolling duty and on the basis of suspicion, apprehended one Karan Kumar @ Noni who was found in conscious possession of 8.31 grams of Heroin. Initially, the FIR in question was registered against the said co-accused. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further contends that the petitioner was neither present at the spot, nor was named in the FIR and he has no concern with the said incident. He further contends that the petitioner has been minated as an accused only on the basis of the disclosure accused Karan Kumar @ Noni. Apart from the disclosure statement, there is no other evidence to connect the petitioner with the offence in question and it is a trite closure statement of the co-accused during his/her admissible in evidence. No recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation as and when called upon to do so by the investigating agency. On the other hand, learned State counsel has filed the status report in the matter and while referring to the status report, has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail, by submitting that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are In the meantime, the petitioner is directed to join investigation within a week from today and would appear as and when required by the Investigating Officer and cooperate with the Investigating Agency. In the event of arrest, he shall be im bail on furnishing of bail/surety bonds to the 29 of the NDPS Act added later on) at Police Brief facts as per the prosecution case are that on 22.01.2026, Inspector Manohar Singh along with fellow police and on the basis of suspicion, apprehended one Karan Kumar @ Noni who was found in conscious possession of 8.31 grams of Heroin. Initially, the FIR Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further contends that the petitioner was neither present at the spot, nor was named in the FIR and he has no concern with the said incident. He further contends that the petitioner has been minated as an accused only on the basis of the disclosure accused Karan Kumar @ Noni. Apart from the disclosure statement, there is no other evidence to connect the petitioner with the offence in question and it is a trite accused during his/her admissible in evidence. No Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the the investigation as and On the other hand, learned State counsel has filed the status report in the matter and while referring to the status ail, by submitting that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are In the meantime, the petitioner is directed to join investigation within a week from today and would appear as and when required by the Investigating Officer and cooperate with the Investigating Agency. In the event of arrest, he shall be im bail on furnishing of bail/surety bonds to the GURPREET 2026.04.18 18:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-16866 satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioners shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in c with the order dated the investigation. the petitioner and implicated only 4. Learned counsel for the State, Singh, has submitted that the petitioner has joined the investigation of interim order/protection earlier afforded to the petitioner required for further since the FIR in question is under the NDPS Act of 1985, the petitioner ought not to be extended the concession of anticipatory bail. 5. On a specific query put by this Court to the learned State counsel as to whether, apart from the disclosure statement, any material has been found during investigation to connect the petitioner with the recove contraband, to which learned State counsel submitted that no material other than disclosure statement has been found to connect the petitioner with either the offence or the recovered contraband. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the rival parties available record. 7. Further, grant of anticipatory bail in a case under NDPS Act, 1985; in a judgment 16866-2026 3 satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioners shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023.” Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in c the order dated 01.04.2026 passed by this Court, the petitioner has joined the investigation. He has further argued that there is no connection between the petitioner and the co-accused and that implicated only on the basis of the disclosure statement Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from SI Gurmeet has submitted that the petitioner has joined the investigation of interim order/protection earlier afforded to the petitioner required for further custodial interrogation. H since the FIR in question is under the NDPS Act of 1985, the petitioner ought ended the concession of anticipatory bail. On a specific query put by this Court to the learned State counsel as to whether, apart from the disclosure statement, any material has been found during investigation to connect the petitioner with the recove contraband, to which learned State counsel submitted that no material other than disclosure statement has been found to connect the petitioner with either the offence or the recovered contraband. I have heard learned counsel for the rival parties available record. Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court while dealing with a plea for grant of anticipatory bail in a case under NDPS Act, 1985; in a judgment satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioners shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance passed by this Court, the petitioner has joined e has further argued that there is no connection between that the petitioner is sought to be disclosure statement of the co-accused. on instructions from SI Gurmeet has submitted that the petitioner has joined the investigation in terms of interim order/protection earlier afforded to the petitioner and is no longer He has however submitted that since the FIR in question is under the NDPS Act of 1985, the petitioner ought ended the concession of anticipatory bail. On a specific query put by this Court to the learned State counsel as to whether, apart from the disclosure statement, any material has been found during investigation to connect the petitioner with the recovered contraband, to which learned State counsel submitted that no material other than disclosure statement has been found to connect the petitioner with either I have heard learned counsel for the rival parties and perused the he Hon'ble Supreme Court while dealing with a plea for grant of anticipatory bail in a case under NDPS Act, 1985; in a judgment satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioners shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section ompliance passed by this Court, the petitioner has joined e has further argued that there is no connection between the petitioner is sought to be on instructions from SI Gurmeet in terms and is no longer submitted that since the FIR in question is under the NDPS Act of 1985, the petitioner ought On a specific query put by this Court to the learned State counsel as to whether, apart from the disclosure statement, any material has been red contraband, to which learned State counsel submitted that no material other than disclosure statement has been found to connect the petitioner with either and perused the he Hon'ble Supreme Court while dealing with a plea for grant of anticipatory bail in a case under NDPS Act, 1985; in a judgment GURPREET 2026.04.18 18:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-16866 titled as ‘Vijay Singh vs. The State of Haryana, bearing Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.(s)1266/2023 decided on 17.05.2023’ "The petitioner is alleged to have committed offences under Sections 15 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter called the NDPS Act". His application for anticipatory bail was rejected by the High Court. The allegati Post) was recovered from the co concededly was not present at the spot but was named by the co accused. That apart there is no other material to implicate the petitioner. The prose allegations of commission of offence under the NDPS Act are pending against the petitioner. It is not denied that in those proceedings he was granted bail. Having regard to these circumstances, the petitioner is directed anticipatory bail, subject to such terms and conditions as the trial Court may impose. The petition is allowed. All pending applications are disposed of." 8. In the present case also, t solely on the basis of say there is no other material available to connect the petitioner with the recovered contraband. The veracity of the disclosure statement made by the co-accused will be subject to comprehe trial and the same cannot anticipatory bail to the petitioner investigation in terms of interim 9. In view of the above, order dated 01.04.2026 16866-2026 4 ‘Vijay Singh vs. The State of Haryana, bearing Special Leave to l (Crl.) No.(s)1266/2023 decided on 17.05.2023’ "The petitioner is alleged to have committed offences under Sections 15 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter called the NDPS Act". His application for anticipatory bail was rejected by the High Court. The allegations in the FIR are that 1.7 Kg of Poppy Straw (Doda Post) was recovered from the co concededly was not present at the spot but was named by the co accused. That apart there is no other material to implicate the petitioner. The prosecution urges that another case with allegations of commission of offence under the NDPS Act are pending against the petitioner. It is not denied that in those proceedings he was granted bail. Having regard to these circumstances, the petitioner is directed anticipatory bail, subject to such terms and conditions as the trial Court may impose. The petition is allowed. All pending applications are disposed of." In the present case also, the petitioner is sought to be arrayed he basis of the disclosure statement of the co say there is no other material available to connect the petitioner with the recovered contraband. The veracity of the disclosure statement made by the accused will be subject to comprehensive scrutiny during the course of the same cannot by itself be a ground to decline the concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, especially when he has joined the investigation in terms of interim order/protection granted by this C In view of the above, the petition is allowed and 01.04.2026 passed by this Court is made absolute. The petitioner ‘Vijay Singh vs. The State of Haryana, bearing Special Leave to l (Crl.) No.(s)1266/2023 decided on 17.05.2023’ has held as under: "The petitioner is alleged to have committed offences under Sections 15 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter called the NDPS Act". His application for anticipatory bail was rejected by the High Court. ons in the FIR are that 1.7 Kg of Poppy Straw (Doda Post) was recovered from the co-accused. The petitioner concededly was not present at the spot but was named by the co- accused. That apart there is no other material to implicate the cution urges that another case with allegations of commission of offence under the NDPS Act are pending against the petitioner. It is not denied that in those proceedings he was granted bail. Having regard to these circumstances, the petitioner is directed to the enlarged on anticipatory bail, subject to such terms and conditions as the trial Court may impose. The petition is allowed. All pending he petitioner is sought to be arrayed disclosure statement of the co-accused. Suffice to say there is no other material available to connect the petitioner with the recovered contraband. The veracity of the disclosure statement made by the nsive scrutiny during the course of the be a ground to decline the concession of especially when he has joined the protection granted by this Court. the petition is allowed and the interim is made absolute. The petitioner ‘Vijay Singh vs. The State of Haryana, bearing Special Leave to "The petitioner is alleged to have committed offences under Sections 15 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter called the NDPS Act". His application for anticipatory bail was rejected by the High Court. ons in the FIR are that 1.7 Kg of Poppy Straw (Doda accused. The petitioner - accused. That apart there is no other material to implicate the cution urges that another case with allegations of commission of offence under the NDPS Act are pending against the petitioner. It is not denied that in those proceedings he was granted bail. Having regard to these to the enlarged on anticipatory bail, subject to such terms and conditions as the trial Court may impose. The petition is allowed. All pending he petitioner is sought to be arrayed accused. Suffice to say there is no other material available to connect the petitioner with the recovered contraband. The veracity of the disclosure statement made by the nsive scrutiny during the course of the be a ground to decline the concession of especially when he has joined the the interim is made absolute. The petitioner GURPREET 2026.04.18 18:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-16866 shall continue to join investigation as and when Officer and shall also abi 482(2) of the BNSS. 10. Needless to say anything observed herein above shall not be construed to be an opinion on the merits of the case. 18.04.2026 Gurpreet 16866-2026 5 shall continue to join investigation as and when Officer and shall also abide by the conditions as provided under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. Needless to say anything observed herein above shall not be construed to be an opinion on the merits of the case. i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No ii) Whether reportable? Yes/No shall continue to join investigation as and when required by the Investigating de by the conditions as provided under Section Needless to say anything observed herein above shall not be construed to be an opinion on the merits of the case. (RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL) JUDGE speaking/reasoned? Yes/No by the Investigating de by the conditions as provided under Section Needless to say anything observed herein above shall not be (RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL) GURPREET 2026.04.18 18:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document.