CRM-M-54636- 142 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Jairam alias Sonu State of Haryana CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE Present: Mr. R.N.Lohan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sushil Bhardwaj, Addl. A.G Haryana. MANDEEP PANNU J. 1. This is the Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 74 Act at Police Station 2. As per the prosecution case, on 18.03.2025, a police party headed by ASI Manoj Kumar, while present on Uchana Kalan to Bhongra Road near Rajabha Bridge within the jurisdiction of Police Station Uchana, received secret information regarding the movem Acting upon the said information, the police apprehended co Chhota and Sumit alias Koki, who were travelling on a motorcycle bearing registration No. HR allegedly containing Charas (Sulfa) weighing 1 kilogram and 22 grams was recovered from their possession, which they were allegedly carrying without any permit or licence. After completing the requisite formalities and complying with the provisions of the NDPS Act, the said accused persons were arrested. -2025 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -.- CRM Date of Decision : Jairam alias Sonu VERSUS Haryana HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU Mr. R.N.Lohan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sushil Bhardwaj, Addl. A.G Haryana. -.- MANDEEP PANNU J. (Oral) This is the first petition filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in 74 dated 18.03.2025, registered under Sections at Police Station Uchana, District Jind. As per the prosecution case, on 18.03.2025, a police party headed by ASI Manoj Kumar, while present on Uchana Kalan to Bhongra Road near Rajabha Bridge within the jurisdiction of Police Station Uchana, received secret information regarding the movement of certain persons carrying contraband. Acting upon the said information, the police apprehended co Chhota and Sumit alias Koki, who were travelling on a motorcycle bearing registration No. HR-32C-7380. During checking, a black colo allegedly containing Charas (Sulfa) weighing 1 kilogram and 22 grams was recovered from their possession, which they were allegedly carrying without any permit or licence. After completing the requisite formalities and complying with provisions of the NDPS Act, the said accused persons were arrested. -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-54636-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision : 09.03.2026 ....Petitioner ....Respondent MANDEEP PANNU Mr. R.N.Lohan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sushil Bhardwaj, Addl. A.G Haryana. petition filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in , registered under Sections 20-C and 29 of NDPS As per the prosecution case, on 18.03.2025, a police party headed by ASI Manoj Kumar, while present on Uchana Kalan to Bhongra Road near Rajabha Bridge within the jurisdiction of Police Station Uchana, received secret ent of certain persons carrying contraband. Acting upon the said information, the police apprehended co-accused Raman alias Chhota and Sumit alias Koki, who were travelling on a motorcycle bearing 7380. During checking, a black coloured polythene bag allegedly containing Charas (Sulfa) weighing 1 kilogram and 22 grams was recovered from their possession, which they were allegedly carrying without any permit or licence. After completing the requisite formalities and complying with provisions of the NDPS Act, the said accused persons were arrested. petition filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in of NDPS As per the prosecution case, on 18.03.2025, a police party headed by ASI Manoj Kumar, while present on Uchana Kalan to Bhongra Road near Rajabha Bridge within the jurisdiction of Police Station Uchana, received secret ent of certain persons carrying contraband. accused Raman alias Chhota and Sumit alias Koki, who were travelling on a motorcycle bearing ured polythene bag allegedly containing Charas (Sulfa) weighing 1 kilogram and 22 grams was recovered from their possession, which they were allegedly carrying without any permit or licence. After completing the requisite formalities and complying with TRIPTI SAINI 2026.03.09 16:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-54636- 3. During investigation, the aforesaid co statements to the effect that the recovered contraband had been purchased from co accused Jaswant. Thereafter, suffered a disclosure statement alleging that he had procured the contraband from the present petitioner, namely Jairam alias Sonu. On the basis of the said disclosure statement, the present petitioner was of the prosecution that an amount of during investigation. After completion of the investigation, the final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. has been presented before 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the petitioner has been nominated solely on the basis of the disclosure statement of co Jaswant, who himself was implicated on the basis of the disclosure statements of co-accused Raman alias Chhota and Sumit alias Koki. Learned counsel further submits that no recovery of contraband has been effected from the conscious possession of the petit which by itself cannot connect him with the alleged contraband. It is argued that the evidentiary value of disclosure statements of co petitioner deserves the concession petitioner is in custody since 05.06.2025 and the trial is likely to take time to conclude. 5. Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the prayer for bail and submits that the petitioner is involved submitted that the petitioner was nominated during investigation on the basis of disclosure statement of co -2025 (O&M) During investigation, the aforesaid co statements to the effect that the recovered contraband had been purchased from co accused Jaswant. Thereafter, Jaswant was arrested on 26.05.2025 and he in turn suffered a disclosure statement alleging that he had procured the contraband from the present petitioner, namely Jairam alias Sonu. On the basis of the said disclosure statement, the present petitioner was arrested on 05.06.2025. It is further the case of the prosecution that an amount of ₹3,000/- during investigation. After completion of the investigation, the final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. has been presented before the competent Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the petitioner has been nominated solely on the basis of the disclosure statement of co Jaswant, who himself was implicated on the basis of the disclosure statements of accused Raman alias Chhota and Sumit alias Koki. Learned counsel further submits that no recovery of contraband has been effected from the conscious possession of the petitioner and the only recovery attributed to him is which by itself cannot connect him with the alleged contraband. It is argued that the evidentiary value of disclosure statements of co petitioner deserves the concession of bail. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is in custody since 05.06.2025 and the trial is likely to take time to Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the prayer for bail and submits that the petitioner is involved in another case as well. It is further submitted that the petitioner was nominated during investigation on the basis of disclosure statement of co-accused Jaswant and an amount of -2- During investigation, the aforesaid co-accused suffered disclosure statements to the effect that the recovered contraband had been purchased from co Jaswant was arrested on 26.05.2025 and he in turn suffered a disclosure statement alleging that he had procured the contraband from the present petitioner, namely Jairam alias Sonu. On the basis of the said disclosure arrested on 05.06.2025. It is further the case was recovered from the petitioner during investigation. After completion of the investigation, the final report under the competent Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the petitioner has been nominated solely on the basis of the disclosure statement of co-accused Jaswant, who himself was implicated on the basis of the disclosure statements of accused Raman alias Chhota and Sumit alias Koki. Learned counsel further submits that no recovery of contraband has been effected from the conscious ioner and the only recovery attributed to him is ₹3,000/ which by itself cannot connect him with the alleged contraband. It is argued that the evidentiary value of disclosure statements of co-accused is limited and the of bail. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is in custody since 05.06.2025 and the trial is likely to take time to Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the prayer for bail and in another case as well. It is further submitted that the petitioner was nominated during investigation on the basis of accused Jaswant and an amount of ₹3,000/- was also accused suffered disclosure statements to the effect that the recovered contraband had been purchased from co- Jaswant was arrested on 26.05.2025 and he in turn suffered a disclosure statement alleging that he had procured the contraband from the present petitioner, namely Jairam alias Sonu. On the basis of the said disclosure arrested on 05.06.2025. It is further the case was recovered from the petitioner during investigation. After completion of the investigation, the final report under Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the petitioner has accused Jaswant, who himself was implicated on the basis of the disclosure statements of accused Raman alias Chhota and Sumit alias Koki. Learned counsel further submits that no recovery of contraband has been effected from the conscious ₹3,000/-, which by itself cannot connect him with the alleged contraband. It is argued that accused is limited and the of bail. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is in custody since 05.06.2025 and the trial is likely to take time to Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the prayer for bail and in another case as well. It is further submitted that the petitioner was nominated during investigation on the basis of was also TRIPTI SAINI 2026.03.09 16:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-54636- recovered from him. However, learned State counsel does no no recovery of contraband has been effected from the petitioner. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record. 7. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, it is that the present petitioner has been nominated in the present case on the basis of the disclosure statement of co basis of disclosure statements of co Koki, from whose possession the alleged recovery of Charas (Sulfa) weighing 1 kilogram and 22 grams was effected. Admittedly, no contraband has been recovered from the possession of the present petitioner and the only recovery attributed to him is and the trial is likely to take time to conclude. 8. The evidentiary value of a disclosure statement of a co absence of recovery or corroboration is weak in view of the settled position of laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in ‘ 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 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 recovere was not present at the spot but was named by the co apart there is no other material to implicate the petitioner. The prosecution urges that another case with allegations of commission of -2025 (O&M) recovered from him. However, learned State counsel does no no recovery of contraband has been effected from the petitioner. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, it is that the present petitioner has been nominated in the present case on the basis of the disclosure statement of co-accused Jaswant, who himself was nominated on the basis of disclosure statements of co-accused Raman alias Chhota and Sumit alias i, from whose possession the alleged recovery of Charas (Sulfa) weighing 1 kilogram and 22 grams was effected. Admittedly, no contraband has been recovered from the possession of the present petitioner and the only recovery attributed to him is ₹3,000/-. The petitioner has been in custody since 05.06.2025 and the trial is likely to take time to conclude. The evidentiary value of a disclosure statement of a co absence of recovery or corroboration is weak in view of the settled position of laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in ‘ Haryana’, bearing Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.(s) 1266/2023 decided on has held as under: The petitioner is alleged to have committed offences under Sections 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 apart there is no other material to implicate the petitioner. The prosecution urges that another case with allegations of commission of -3- recovered from him. However, learned State counsel does not dispute the fact that no recovery of contraband has been effected from the petitioner. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, it is evident that the present petitioner has been nominated in the present case on the basis of accused Jaswant, who himself was nominated on the accused Raman alias Chhota and Sumit alias i, from whose possession the alleged recovery of Charas (Sulfa) weighing 1 kilogram and 22 grams was effected. Admittedly, no contraband has been recovered from the possession of the present petitioner and the only recovery he petitioner has been in custody since 05.06.2025 The evidentiary value of a disclosure statement of a co-accused, in the absence of recovery or corroboration is weak in view of the settled position of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in ‘Vijay Singh vs. The State of Haryana’, bearing Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.(s) 1266/2023 decided on The petitioner is alleged to have committed offences under Sections 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 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 petitioner. The prosecution urges that another case with allegations of commission of t dispute the fact that I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the evident that the present petitioner has been nominated in the present case on the basis of accused Jaswant, who himself was nominated on the accused Raman alias Chhota and Sumit alias i, from whose possession the alleged recovery of Charas (Sulfa) weighing 1 kilogram and 22 grams was effected. Admittedly, no contraband has been recovered from the possession of the present petitioner and the only recovery he petitioner has been in custody since 05.06.2025 accused, in the law Vijay Singh vs. The State of Haryana’, bearing Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.(s) 1266/2023 decided on The petitioner is alleged to have committed offences under Sections and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter called the NDPS Act)". His application for The allegations in the FIR are that 1.7 Kg of Poppy Straw (Doda accused. The petitioner concededly accused. That apart there is no other material to implicate the petitioner. The prosecution urges that another case with allegations of commission of TRIPTI SAINI 2026.03.09 16:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-54636- offen 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 condi the trial Court may impose. The petition is allowed.” 9. As regards the submission of learned State counsel that petitioner is involved in judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in ‘ of U.P. and another’, 2012 (2) SCC 382 circumstances of the present case are to be seen while deciding a bail application and the bail application of the petitioner cannot be reje petitioner is involved in other/ judgment is reproduced hereinbelow: "As observed by the High Court, merely on the basis of criminal antecedents, the claim of the second r other words, it is the duty of the Court to find out the role of the accused in the case in which he has been charged and other circumstances such as possibility of fleeing away from the jurisdiction of the Court etc." 10. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, particularly the fact that the petitioner has been implicated on the basis of disclosure statement of a co no recovery of contraband has been effected from him and considering the period of custody already opinion that the petitioner deserves the concession of regular bail. 11. Consequently, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail subject to hi -2025 (O&M) 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 condi the trial Court may impose. The petition is allowed.” As regards the submission of learned State counsel that petitioner is involved in another case of similar nature judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in ‘Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi Vs. State of U.P. and another’, 2012 (2) SCC 382 in which, it is held that the facts and circumstances of the present case are to be seen while deciding a bail application and the bail application of the petitioner cannot be reje petitioner is involved in other/ another cases). The relevant portion of the said judgment is reproduced hereinbelow:- "As observed by the High Court, merely on the basis of criminal antecedents, the claim of the second r other words, it is the duty of the Court to find out the role of the accused in the case in which he has been charged and other circumstances such as possibility of fleeing away from the jurisdiction of the Court etc." In view of the aforesaid circumstances, particularly the fact that the petitioner has been implicated on the basis of disclosure statement of a co no recovery of contraband has been effected from him and considering the period of custody already undergone by the petitioner, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner deserves the concession of regular bail. Consequently, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail subject to hi -4- ce 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.” As regards the submission of learned State counsel that of similar nature, reference is placed upon the Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi Vs. State in which, it is held that the facts and circumstances of the present case are to be seen while deciding a bail application and the bail application of the petitioner cannot be rejected solely on the ground that the cases). The relevant portion of the said "As observed by the High Court, merely on the basis of criminal antecedents, the claim of the second respondent cannot be rejected. In other words, it is the duty of the Court to find out the role of the accused in the case in which he has been charged and other circumstances such as possibility of fleeing away from the In view of the aforesaid circumstances, particularly the fact that the petitioner has been implicated on the basis of disclosure statement of a co-accused, no recovery of contraband has been effected from him and considering the period undergone by the petitioner, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner deserves the concession of regular bail. Consequently, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds and ce 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 tions as As regards the submission of learned State counsel that , reference is placed upon the Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi Vs. State in which, it is held that the facts and circumstances of the present case are to be seen while deciding a bail application and cted solely on the ground that the cases). The relevant portion of the said "As observed by the High Court, merely on the basis of criminal espondent cannot be rejected. In other words, it is the duty of the Court to find out the role of the accused in the case in which he has been charged and other circumstances such as possibility of fleeing away from the In view of the aforesaid circumstances, particularly the fact that the accused, no recovery of contraband has been effected from him and considering the period undergone by the petitioner, this Court is of the considered Consequently, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is s furnishing bail bonds and TRIPTI SAINI 2026.03.09 16:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-54636- surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. 12. However, it is made clear that any observation made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the 13. All pending miscellaneous disposed of. March 09, 2026 tripti Whether speaking/non Whether reportable -2025 (O&M) surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court/Duty Magistrate However, it is made clear that any observation made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the All pending miscellaneous applic , 2026 Whether speaking/non-speaking : Speaking Whether reportable : Yes/No -5- surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court/Duty Magistrate However, it is made clear that any observation made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case cation(s), if any, shall also stand (MANDEEP PANNU) JUDGE : Speaking : Yes/No surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court/Duty Magistrate However, it is made clear that any observation made hereinabove (s), if any, shall also stand TRIPTI SAINI 2026.03.09 16:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document