CRM-M-17145 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA 218 KARANDEEP SINGH STATE OF PUNJAB CORAM:- HON'BLE 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 Section 21 and 29 of the NDPS Act, at Polic District ANTF Wing, SAS Nagar (Mohali) 2. On the BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the pe in case FIR No.215 dated 14.08.2025 registered under Section 21 and 29 of the NDPS Act, at Police Station Anti Narcotics Force, District ANTF Wing, SAS Nagar (Mohali). petitioner has been f further submitted that the petitioner was neither present at the spot, nor was named in the FIR and he has no concern with the 17145-2026 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM Date of decision: KARANDEEP SINGH Versus PUNJAB HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Mr. K.S. Brar, 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.215 dated 14.08.2025 registered under Section 21 and 29 of the NDPS Act, at Polic District ANTF Wing, SAS Nagar (Mohali). 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 pe in case FIR No.215 dated 14.08.2025 registered under Section 21 and 29 of the NDPS Act, at Police Station Anti Narcotics Force, District ANTF Wing, SAS Nagar (Mohali). Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submitted that the petitioner was neither present at the spot, nor was named in the FIR and he has no concern with the IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-17145-2026 Date of decision: 28.04.2026 ….Petitioner ....Respondent MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL 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.215 dated 14.08.2025 registered under Section 21 and 29 of the NDPS Act, at Police Station Anti Narcotics Force, 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.215 dated 14.08.2025 registered under Section 21 and 29 of the NDPS Act, at Police Station Anti Narcotics Force, District ANTF Wing, SAS Nagar (Mohali). Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the alsely implicated in the present case. He further submitted that the petitioner was neither present at the spot, nor was named in the FIR and he has no concern with the ….Petitioner ....Respondent Through the instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNSS”), the petitioner FIR No.215 dated 14.08.2025 registered under e Station Anti Narcotics Force, Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 482 of titioner in case FIR No.215 dated 14.08.2025 registered under Section 21 and 29 of the NDPS Act, at Police Station Anti Narcotics Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the alsely implicated in the present case. He further submitted that the petitioner was neither present at the spot, nor was named in the FIR and he has no concern with the GURPREET 2026.04.29 16:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-17145 said offence. It has also been contended that the petitioner has been nominated as an a statement made by co with huge recovery of 620 grams of heroin. Apart from the disclosure statement, there is no other evidence to connect the petitioner with the offence i disclosure statement of the co interrogation is not admissible. No recovery is to be effected from him. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to joi when called upon to do so by the investigating agency. status report in the matter, which is taken on record and while referring to the same, he has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail, by submitting that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature. investigation within a week from today and would appear as an 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 fumishing of bail/surety bonds to the 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 the investigation. the petitioner and implicated only on the basis of 17145-2026 2 said offence. 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, who was apprehended at the spot with huge recovery of 620 grams of heroin. 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 interrogation is not admissible. No recovery is to be effected from him. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to joi 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, which is taken on record and while referring to the same, he has opposed the prayer for anticipatory 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 an 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 fumishing of bail/surety bonds to the 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 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 said offence. It has also been contended that the petitioner has ccused only on the basis of the disclosure accused, who was apprehended at the spot with huge recovery of 620 grams of heroin. Apart from the disclosure statement, there is no other evidence to connect the n 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 him. 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. On the other hand, learned State counsel has filed the status report in the matter, which is taken on record and while referring to the same, he has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail, by submitting that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature. 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 fumishing 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 further argued that there is no connection between that the petitioner is sought to be disclosure statement of the co-accused. said offence. It has also been contended that the petitioner has ccused only on the basis of the disclosure accused, who was apprehended at the spot with huge recovery of 620 grams of heroin. Apart from the disclosure statement, there is no other evidence to connect the n question and it is a trite law that accused during his custodial interrogation is not admissible. No recovery is to be effected from him. Learned counsel has further submitted that the n the investigation as and On the other hand, learned State counsel has filed the status report in the matter, which is taken on record and while grant of anticipatory bail, by submitting that the allegations levelled In the meantime, the petitioner is directed to join d 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 fumishing 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 further argued that there is no connection between the petitioner is sought to be GURPREET 2026.04.29 16:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-17145 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 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 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 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 17145-2026 3 Learned counsel for the State, on instructions fr has submitted that the petitioner has joined the investigation of interim order/protection earlier afforded to the petitioner required for further custodial interrogation. Sh 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 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 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 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 on instructions from ASI Jarnail 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 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 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 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 om ASI Jarnail in terms and is no longer submitted that 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 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 "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 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 GURPREET 2026.04.29 16:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-17145 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. 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 17145-2026 4 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 granted by this Court. 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 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 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 Officer and shall also abide 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 i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No 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 g Officer and shall also abide by the conditions as provided under Section 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.