CRM-M-16421 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA 219 ARASHDEEP SINGH ALIAS ARSH 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 Section 21(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psyc (Section 29 of the NDPS Act added later on), at Police Station Khem Karan, District Tarn Taran 2. On 482 of the BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.09 dated 22.01.2026 registered under Section 21(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic 16421-2026 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM Date of decision: ARASHDEEP SINGH ALIAS ARSH Versus PUNJAB HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Mr. P.S. Kanwar, 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.09 dated 22.01.2026 registered under Section 21(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psyc (Section 29 of the NDPS Act added later on), at Police Station Khem Karan, District Tarn Taran. On 08.04.2026, 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.09 dated 22.01.2026 registered under Section 21(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-16421-2026 Date of decision: 23.04.2026 ….Petitioner ....Respondent HON'BLE 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.09 dated 22.01.2026 registered under Section 21(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (Section 29 of the NDPS Act added later on), at Police Station Khem Karan, 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.09 dated 22.01.2026 registered under Section 21(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic ….Petitioner ....Respondent Through the instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNSS”), the petitioner FIR No.09 dated 22.01.2026 registered under hotropic Substances Act, 1985 (Section 29 of the NDPS Act added later on), at Police Station Khem Karan, 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.09 dated 22.01.2026 registered under Section 21(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic GURPREET 2026.04.24 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-16421 Substances Act, 1985 (Sect on), at Police Station Khem Karan, District Tarn Taran. petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submitted that the petitioner was ne 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 apprehended at the spot with huge recovery of 392 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 during his custodial interrogation is not admissible. Moreover, the petitioner has clean antecedents as he is not involved in any other case and no recovery is to be effected from him. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner is ready willing to join the investigation as and 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 oppose anticipatory bail, by submitting that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature. However, he has not controverted the fact that the petitioner is a first time offender as he is not involved in any other 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 arres admitted to interim bail on furnishing of bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner 16421-2026 2 Substances Act, 1985 (Section 29 of the NDPS Act added later on), at Police Station Khem Karan, District Tarn Taran. 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 ne 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 Nishan Singh, apprehended at the spot with huge recovery of 392 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 during his custodial interrogation is not admissible. Moreover, the petitioner has clean antecedents as he is not involved in any other case and no recovery is to be effected from him. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner is ready 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 oppose anticipatory bail, by submitting that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature. However, he has not controverted the fact that the petitioner is a first time offender as he is not involved in any other case. Adjourned to 23.04.2026. 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 arres admitted to interim bail on furnishing of bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner ion 29 of the NDPS Act added later on), at Police Station Khem Karan, District Tarn Taran. 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 said incident. It has also been contended that the petitioner has been nominated as an accused only on the basis of the disclosure accused Nishan Singh, who was apprehended at the spot with huge recovery of 392 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-accused during his custodial interrogation is not admissible. Moreover, the petitioner has clean antecedents as he is not involved in any other case and 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 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. However, he has not controverted the fact that the petitioner is a first time offender as case. 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 satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner ion 29 of the NDPS Act added later Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He ither 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 who was apprehended at the spot with huge recovery of 392 grams of heroin. Apart from the disclosure statement, there is no other evidence to connect the petitioner with the offence in question used during his custodial interrogation is not admissible. Moreover, the petitioner has clean antecedents as he is not involved in any other case and no recovery is to be effected from him. Learned and willing to join the investigation as and when called upon to do so On the other hand, learned State counsel has filed the status report in the matter, which is taken on record and while d the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail, by submitting that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature. However, he has not controverted the fact that the petitioner is a first time offender as 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 t, he shall be admitted to interim bail on furnishing of bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner GURPREET 2026.04.24 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-16421 shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023. 3. Learned counsel for t with the order dated the investigation. the petitioner and implicated only on the basis of 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 rec 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 parti available record. 7. Further, grant of anticipatory bail in a case under NDPS Act, 1985; in a judgment 16421-2026 3 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 08.04.2026 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 ASI Gurdial 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 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 rec 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 parti 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 shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section he 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 ASI Gurdial 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 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 shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section he petitioner submits that in compliance passed by this Court, the petitioner has joined e has further argued that there is no connection between is sought to be on instructions from ASI Gurdial 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 overed contraband, to which learned State counsel submitted that no material other than disclosure statement has been found to connect the petitioner with either es 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 2026.04.24 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-16421 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 08.04.2026 16421-2026 4 ‘Vijay Singh vs. The State of Haryana, bearing Special Leave to peal (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 08.04.2026 passed by this Court is made absolute. The petitioner ‘Vijay Singh vs. The State of Haryana, bearing Special Leave to peal (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 2026.04.24 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-16421 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. 23.04.2026 Gurpreet 16421-2026 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 2026.04.24 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document.