CRM-M-27093 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA 211 SARWAN SINGH STATE OF PUNJAB CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. Present:- Mr. Narinder S. Lucky, 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-B of the Narcotic Drugs and Psych (Section 29 of the NPDS Act added later on vide DDR No.36 dated 27.03.2026), at Police Station Sarai Amanat Khan, District Tarn Taran 2. On the BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.32 dated 26.03.2026 registered under Section 21 B of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (Section 29 of the NPDS Act ad 27093-2026 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM Date of decision: SARWAN SINGH Versus STATE OF PUNJAB HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Mr. Narinder S. Lucky, 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.32 dated 26.03.2026 registered under B of the Narcotic Drugs and Psych (Section 29 of the NPDS Act added later on vide DDR No.36 dated 27.03.2026), at Police Station Sarai Amanat Khan, District Tarn Taran On 14.05.2026, 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.32 dated 26.03.2026 registered under Section 21 B of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (Section 29 of the NPDS Act ad IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-27093-2026 Date of decision: 25.05.2026 ….Petitioner ....Respondent 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.32 dated 26.03.2026 registered under B of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (Section 29 of the NPDS Act added later on vide DDR No.36 dated 27.03.2026), at Police Station Sarai Amanat Khan, District Tarn Taran. following order was passed by this Court: - tition filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.32 dated 26.03.2026 registered under Section 21- B of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (Section 29 of the NPDS Act added later on vide DDR No.36 ….Petitioner ....Respondent Through the instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNSS”), the petitioner FIR No.32 dated 26.03.2026 registered under otropic Substances Act, 1985 (Section 29 of the NPDS Act added later on vide DDR No.36 dated tition filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner - B of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 ded later on vide DDR No.36 GURPREET 2026.05.26 16:44 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-27093 dated 27.03.2026), at Police Station Sarai Amanat Khan, District Tarn Taran. petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submitted that the pet 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 the disclosure statement made by co the spot with 21 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 not admissible. Further, co similar footing with the present petitioner, has already been granted the concession of anticipatory bail by this Court, vide order dated 07.05.2026. No recovery is 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. Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondent time to file status report in the matter. investigation within a week from today and would appear 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 petit shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023. 27093-2026 2 dated 27.03.2026), at Police Station Sarai Amanat Khan, 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 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 Babba, who was apprehended at the spot with 21 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 not admissible. Further, co-accused Rohit Singh, who was on similar footing with the present petitioner, has already been granted the concession of anticipatory bail by this Court, vide order dated 07.05.2026. No recovery is 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. Notice of motion. On asking of the Court, Mr. Jasjit Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondent time to file status report in the matter. Adjourned to 25.05.2026. In the meantime, the petitioner is directed to join investigation within a week from today and would appear 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 petit shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023.” dated 27.03.2026), at Police Station Sarai Amanat Khan, District Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He itioner was neither 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 the disclosure Babba, who was apprehended at the spot with 21 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 accused during his custodial interrogation is accused Rohit Singh, who was on similar footing with the present petitioner, has already been granted the concession of anticipatory bail by this Court, vide order dated 07.05.2026. 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. On asking of the Court, Mr. Jasjit Singh Rattu, DAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State and seeks time to file status report in the matter. 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 shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section dated 27.03.2026), at Police Station Sarai Amanat Khan, District Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He itioner was neither 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 the disclosure Babba, who was apprehended at the spot with 21 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 his custodial interrogation is accused Rohit Singh, who was on similar footing with the present petitioner, has already been granted the concession of anticipatory bail by this Court, vide to be effected from the petitioner. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation as and Singh Rattu, DAG, State and seeks In the meantime, the petitioner is directed to join 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 ioner shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section GURPREET 2026.05.26 16:44 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-27093 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 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, a 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’ 27093-2026 3 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance the order dated 14.05.2026 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 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 nce 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, a 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 nce 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’ Learned counsel for the 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. Learned counsel for the State, on instructions of SI Dilbhag 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 nce 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: Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance passed by this Court, the petitioner has joined e has further argued that there is no connection between the petitioner is sought to be ons of SI Dilbhag in terms and is no longer submitted that nce 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 ny 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 GURPREET 2026.05.26 16:44 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-27093 "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 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 14.05.2026 shall continue to join investigation as and when 27093-2026 4 "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 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 14.05.2026 passed by this Court is made absolute. The petitioner shall continue to join investigation as and when "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 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 "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 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 GURPREET 2026.05.26 16:44 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-27093 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. 25.05.2026 Gurpreet 27093-2026 5 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 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 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 2026.05.26 16:44 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document.