CRM-M-22824 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA 219 TONI KUMAR STATE OF HARYANA CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. Present:- Mr. Kuldeep Singh Siwach, Mr. Mohit Chaudhary, AAG, Haryana. 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(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Ps (Section 27-A of the NDPS Act added lateron), at Police Station City Ratia, District Fatehabad 2. On 482 of t petitioner in case FIR No.13 dated 13.01.2026, registered under Sections 21(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (Section 27 lateron), at Police Statio petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further contends that the petitioner was neither 22824-2026 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM Date of decision: TONI KUMAR Versus HARYANA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Mr. Kuldeep Singh Siwach, Advocate Mr. Mohit Chaudhary, AAG, Haryana. ***** 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.13 dated 13.01.2026, registered under Sections 21(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 A of the NDPS Act added lateron), at Police Station City Ratia, District Fatehabad. On 07.05.2026, 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.13 dated 13.01.2026, registered under Sections 21(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (Section 27 lateron), at Police Station City Ratia, District Fatehabad. 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 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-22824-2026 Date of decision: 18.05.2026 ….Petitioner ....Respondent JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Mohit Chaudhary, AAG, Haryana. Through the instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNSS”), the petitioner FIR No.13 dated 13.01.2026, registered under ychotropic Substances Act, 1985 A of the NDPS Act added lateron), at Police Station City Ratia, following order was passed by this Court: - Prayer in the present petition filed under Section he BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.13 dated 13.01.2026, registered under Sections 21(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (Section 27-A of the NDPS Act added n City Ratia, District Fatehabad. 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 ….Petitioner ....Respondent Through the instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNSS”), the petitioner FIR No.13 dated 13.01.2026, registered under ychotropic Substances Act, 1985 A of the NDPS Act added lateron), at Police Station City Ratia, Prayer in the present petition filed under Section he BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.13 dated 13.01.2026, registered under Sections 21(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic A of the NDPS Act added 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 GURPREET 2026.05.19 16:44 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-22824 present at the spot nor was named in the concern with the said offence. It has also been contended that the petitioner has been nominated as an accused only on the basis of disclosure statement made by co Apart from the disclosure statement, there is connect the petitioner with the offence in question and it is a trite law that disclosure statement of co interrogation is not admissible. Learned counsel submits that the co concession of regular bail by the learned trial Court vide order dated 24.02.2026 (Annexure P from the petitioner. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner when called upon to do so by the investigating agency. status report, which is taken on record. He while referring to the said status report, has opposed the prayer for gr submitting that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature. investigation when required the Investigating Agency. In the admitted to interim bail on furnishing of satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. The shall also abid 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 22824-2026 2 present at the spot nor was named in the concern with the said offence. It has also been contended that the petitioner has been nominated as an accused only on the basis of disclosure statement made by co Apart from the disclosure statement, there is connect the petitioner with the offence in question and it is a trite law that disclosure statement of co interrogation is not admissible. Learned counsel submits that the co-accused Chhinderpal @ Sonu has concession of regular bail by the learned trial Court vide order dated 24.02.2026 (Annexure P-2). No recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to when called upon to do so by the investigating agency. On the other hand, learned State counsel has filed the status report, which is taken on record. He while referring to the said status report, has opposed the prayer for gr submitting that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature. Adjourned to 18.05.2026. 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 admitted to interim bail on furnishing of satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. The 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 07.05.2026 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 present at the spot nor was named in the FIR and he has no concern with the said offence. It has also been contended that the petitioner has been nominated as an accused only on the basis of disclosure statement made by co-accused Chhinderpal @ Sonu. 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 co-accused during his custodial interrogation is not admissible. Learned counsel submits that the accused Chhinderpal @ Sonu has already been granted the concession of regular bail by the learned trial Court vide order 2). No recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. Learned counsel has further submitted that 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, which is taken on record. He while referring to the said status report, has opposed the prayer for grant of bail by submitting that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are In the meantime, the petitioner is directed to join within a week from today and would appear as and 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 e by the conditions as envisaged under Section Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance passed by this Court, the petitioner has joined that there is no connection between that the petitioner is sought to be disclosure statement of the co-accused. FIR and he has no concern with the said offence. It has also been contended that the petitioner has been nominated as an accused only on the basis of accused Chhinderpal @ Sonu. no other evidence to connect the petitioner with the offence in question and it is a trite accused during his custodial interrogation is not admissible. Learned counsel submits that the already been granted the concession of regular bail by the learned trial Court vide order 2). No recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. Learned counsel has further submitted that join the investigation as and On the other hand, learned State counsel has filed the status report, which is taken on record. He while referring to the ant of bail by submitting that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are In the meantime, the petitioner is directed to join within a week from today and would appear as and Investigating Officer and cooperate with event of arrest, he shall be bail/surety bonds to the petitioner e by the conditions as envisaged under Section Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance passed by this Court, the petitioner has joined that there is no connection between the petitioner is sought to be GURPREET 2026.05.19 16:44 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-22824 4. Learned counsel for the State, Kumar, 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 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 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 reco 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 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 22824-2026 3 Learned counsel for the State, on instructions of PSI Sandeep 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 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 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. 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 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 on instructions of PSI Sandeep 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 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. 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 on instructions of PSI Sandeep in terms and is no longer submitted that question is under the NDPS Act of 1985, the petitioner ought On a specific query put by this Court to the learned State counsel 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 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 GURPREET 2026.05.19 16:44 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-22824 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 07.05.2026 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. 18.05.2026 Gurpreet 22824-2026 4 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 07.05.2026 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 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 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 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 by the Investigating de by the conditions as provided under Section Needless to say anything observed herein above shall not be (RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL) GURPREET 2026.05.19 16:44 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document.