CRM-M-14784 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA 215 JAGBIR SINGH @ ANMOL STATE OF PUNJAB CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Present:- M for the petitioner. Ms. Amrit Kaur Mahir, AAG, 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 Sections 21(c), 23, 25 and 29 of the Narco Substances Act and Sections 103, 109, 238, 3(5), 105 of BNS, 2023 Sections 25, 27 Arms Act Rural. 2. On the BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.172 dated 11.06.2025, registered under Sections 14784-2026 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM Date of decision: JAGBIR SINGH @ ANMOL Versus PUNJAB HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Mr. Amandeep Singh Manaise, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Amrit Kaur Mahir, AAG, 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.172 dated 11.06.2025, registered under Sections 21(c), 23, 25 and 29 of the Narco Substances Act and Sections 103, 109, 238, 3(5), 105 of BNS, 2023 Sections 25, 27 Arms Act, at Polilce Station Gharinda, District Amritsar On 17.04.2026, 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.172 dated 11.06.2025, registered under Sections IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-14784-2026 Date of decision: 28.04.2026 ….Petitioner ....Respondent HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Advocate Ms. Amrit Kaur Mahir, AAG, Punjab. Through the instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNSS”), the petitioner FIR No.172 dated 11.06.2025, registered under Sections 21(c), 23, 25 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act and Sections 103, 109, 238, 3(5), 105 of BNS, 2023 and , at Polilce Station Gharinda, District Amritsar 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.172 dated 11.06.2025, registered under Sections ….Petitioner ....Respondent Through the instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNSS”), the petitioner FIR No.172 dated 11.06.2025, registered under tic Drugs & Psychotropic and , at Polilce Station Gharinda, District Amritsar 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.172 dated 11.06.2025, registered under Sections GURPREET 2026.04.29 16:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-14784 21(c), 23, 25 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances 2023, at Polilce Station Gharinda, District Amritsar Rural. petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further conte present at the spot, nor was named in the FIR and he has no concern with the said incident. It has also been contended that the petitioner has been nominated as an accused only on the basis of the disclosure statement ma Singh alias Happy and 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 accused during his custodial in recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to join investigating agency. taken on record. He has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail by 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 interim bail on furnis satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance with the order dated 14784-2026 2 21(c), 23, 25 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act and Sections 103, 109, 238, 3(5), 105 of BNS, 2023, at Polilce Station Gharinda, District Amritsar Rural. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is innocent and 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. It has also been contended that the petitioner has been nominated as an accused only on the basis of the disclosure statement ma Singh alias Happy and 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 accused during his custodial interrogation is not admissible. No recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation as and when called upon to do so by the investigating agency. Learned State counsel has filed the status report which is taken on record. He has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail by submitting that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature. Adjourned to 28.04.2026. 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 furnis satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023.” Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance the order dated 17.04.2026 passed by this Court, the petitioner has joined 21(c), 23, 25 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Act and Sections 103, 109, 238, 3(5), 105 of BNS, 2023, at Polilce Station Gharinda, District Amritsar Rural. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the nds that the petitioner was neither present at the spot, nor was named in the FIR and he has no concern with the said incident. It has also been contended that the petitioner has been nominated as an accused only on the basis of the disclosure statement made by co-accused Harpreet Singh alias Happy and 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- terrogation is not admissible. No recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to the investigation as and when called upon to do so by the State counsel has filed the status report which is taken on record. He has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail by submitting that the allegations levelled against the 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 satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner 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 21(c), 23, 25 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Act and Sections 103, 109, 238, 3(5), 105 of BNS, Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the nds that the petitioner was neither present at the spot, nor was named in the FIR and he has no concern with the said incident. It has also been contended that the petitioner has been nominated as an accused only on the accused Harpreet Singh alias Happy and apart from the disclosure statement, there is no other evidence to connect the petitioner with the offence in - terrogation is not admissible. No recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to the investigation as and when called upon to do so by the State counsel has filed the status report which is taken on record. He has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail by submitting that the allegations levelled against the 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 hing of bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner 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 GURPREET 2026.04.29 16:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-14784 the investigation. the petitioner and implicated only on the basis o 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 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 materi 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 and perused the available record. 7. Further, grant of anticipatory bail in a case under NDPS Act, 1985; in a judgment 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 14784-2026 3 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, has submitted that the petitioner has joined the investigation of interim order/protection earlier afforded to the petitioner required for further custodial interrogation. Sh since the FIR in question is under the NDPS Act of 1985, the petitioner ought not to be extended 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 materi 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 and perused the 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 ‘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 e has further argued that there is no connection between that the petitioner is sought to be disclosure statement of the co-accused. Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from SI Rajbir has submitted that the petitioner has joined the investigation in terms of interim order/protection earlier afforded to the petitioner and is no longer She has however submitted that since the FIR in question is under the NDPS Act of 1985, the petitioner ought not to be extended the concession of anticipatory bail. 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 ‘Vijay Singh vs. The State of Haryana, bearing Special Leave to Appeal (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 e has further argued that there is no connection between the petitioner is sought to be on instructions from SI Rajbir in terms and is no longer submitted that since the FIR in question is under the NDPS Act of 1985, the petitioner ought 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 al 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 ‘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 GURPREET 2026.04.29 16:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-14784 application for anticipatory bail was rejected by the High C 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 pet 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 peti 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 s trial and the same cannot anticipatory bail to the petitioner investigation in terms of interim 9. In view of the above, order dated 17.04.2026 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. 14784-2026 4 application for anticipatory bail was rejected by the High C 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 to the enlarged on 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 a solely on the 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 In view of the above, the petition is allowed and 17.04.2026 passed by this Court is made absolute. The petitioner shall continue to join investigation as and when and shall also abide by the conditions as provided under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. 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-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 itioner. 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 tioner 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 ubject to comprehensive 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 shall continue to join investigation as and when required by the Investigating and shall also abide by the conditions as provided under Section ourt. The allegations 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 itioner. 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 tioner 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 rrayed 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 ubject to comprehensive 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 by the Investigating and shall also abide by the conditions as provided under Section GURPREET 2026.04.29 16:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-14784 10. Needless to say anything observed herein above shall not be construed to be an opinion on the merits of the case. 28.04.2026 Gurpreet 14784-2026 5 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 Needless to say anything observed herein above shall not be construed to be an opinion on the merits of the case. (RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL) JUDGE i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No Needless to say anything observed herein above shall not be (RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL) GURPREET 2026.04.29 16:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document.