CRM-M-71629- IN THE H (135) HARI CHAND @ STATE OF HAR CORAM: HON Present: Mr. Mr. N MANISHA BATR 1. The Section 483 of Bh for grant of regul registered under Psychotropic Subs Panchkula. 2. As p information to the were engaged in s date also, they cou the contraband i Believing the sec -2025 (O&M) 1 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB A CHANDIGARH ND @ AJAY MUKHIYA Versus
HARYANA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANIS Mr. Kamal Chaudhary, Advocate for Mr. Neeraj Poswal, AAG, Haryana ****
BATRA, J. (ORAL)
The instant petition has been prefe of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanh regular bail in case arising out of F under Sections 21B, 29 and 27(A Substances Act (for short “NDPS As per the allegations, on 13.10. to the effect that the co-accused Mich ed in sale of narcotic substances in la ey could be apprehended with the sam and in the parking area of Aashi secret information to be true, a r JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH
CRM-M-71629-2025 (O&M) Date of decision : 19.02.2026 ... Petitioner
...Respondent
ANISHA BATRA
te for the petitioner preferred by the petitioner under a Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) ut of FIR No.194 dated 13.10.2025 27(A) of Narcotic Drugs and DPS”) at Police Station Sector 20, 3.10.2025, on a receipt of secret d Michael Masih and Jagroop Singh s in large quantity and on that very he same, as they were standing with Aashiyana, Sector 20, Panchkula. e, a raiding party was formed and M) 2026 nder ) 2025 and r 20, ecret ingh very with kula. and AMIT SHARMA 2026.02.19 16:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-71629- reached at the info Michael Masih. O Rs.20,400/- wer formally arrested. possession. The basis of which co accused. During Masih and Jagroo was in constant to investigation. On that the accused J and he used to sel Section 27 of NDP 3. It is a falsely implicated accused which can has been effected attracted qua him also of non-comm agency has failed on the basis of so was indulged in su -2025 (O&M) 2 he informed place and apprehended th sih. On conducting search, 128 Gram re recovered from their conscio rested. The recovered contraband an The above named accused suffered ich co-accused Gopi @ Gurpreet K uring the course of investigation, the Jagroop was collected and it was reve tant touch with the present petitioner. n. On interrogation, he suffered disc used Jagroop and Michael Masih used to sell the contraband further. The o f NDPS was added. Investigation now It is argued by learned counsel for t icated in this case on the basis of the d ich cannot be considered to be admiss fected from him. The rigors of Sect a him as the recovery allegedly effec commercial quantity. He has clean a failed to establish any link between the of some bank transactions, and any o d in supply/sale of contraband. The tr nded the accused Jagroop Singh and Grams of heroin and drug money of conscious possession. They were nd and drug money was taken into ffered disclosure statements on the reet Kaur was named as additional n, the call detail records of Michael s revealed that the accused Jagroop ioner. The petitioner was joined into d disclosure statement to the effect ih used to supply contraband to him The offence under the provisions of on now stands concluded. l for the petitioner that he has been f the disclosure statement of the co- missible in evidence. No recovery f Section 37 of NDPS Act are not y effected from the co-accused was lean antecedents. The investigating een the petitioner and the co-accused d any other material to show that he The trial will take considerable time and ey of were into the ional chael roop into ffect him ns of been - very not was ating used at he time AMIT SHARMA 2026.02.19 16:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-71629- to conclude. His thus, argued that th 4. Status counsel has argued levelled against benefit of bail. 5. This C at considerable len 6. The Jagroop and as per to him, which wa basis of the disclo Tamil Nadu, (202 disclosure stateme evidence unless co disclosure stateme trial, however, at effected from the p nothing on record, crime or to show the relevant time. take time to concl -2025 (O&M) 3 . His further incarceration would not s that the petition deserves to be allowe Status report and custody certificate h argued that taking into consideration inst the petitioner. The petitioner do This Court has heard the rival submi ble length. The petitioner is alleged to be in as per the further allegations, co-accu ch was further sold by him. The pet disclosure statement of the co-accused (2021) 4 SCC 1, it was observed by tatements made under Section 67 of N less corroborated by independent mate tatement against the petitioner will b er, at this stage, it cannot be ignore m the petitioner. The petitioner was ar rd, at this stage, to connect the pe show that he was connected with the t time. Investigation has been comple conclude. Keeping in view the afor d not serve any useful purpose. It is, allowed. icate have been filed. Learned State n the gravity of the allegations as does not deserve to be extended ubmissions made by both the parties be in contact with the co-accused accused used to supply contraband he petitioner was nominated on the ccused. In Tofan Singh Vs. State of ved by Hon’ble Apex Court that the 7 of NDPS Act, are inadmissible in nt material. While the veracity of the will be tested during the course of ignored that no recovery has been was arrested on 04.11.2025. There is the petitioner either with the subject ith the co-accused in any manner at completed. The trial will obviously e aforesaid facts and circumstances, It is, State ns as nded rties used band n the of t the le in f the se of been re is bject er at usly nces, AMIT SHARMA 2026.02.19 16:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-71629- this Court is of th by keeping the p above discussed fa of the case lest the and the petitioner personal and sure Judicial Magistrate 7. In the petitioner, it shall application seekin 8. Since any, is rendered in 19.02.2026 Amit Sharma -2025 (O&M) 4 s of the considered opinion that no us the petitioner in custody anymore. ssed facts but without meaning to mak est the same prejudice the trial in any m itioner is ordered to be released on b d surety bonds to the satisfaction of gistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned. In the event of there being any FIR t shall be open to the respondent-State seeking cancellation of bail. Since the main petition has been all ered infructuous. (MA Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes
   t no useful purpose would be served ore. Taking into consideration the to make any comments on the merits n any manner, the petition is allowed d on bail, subject to his furnishing ion of the learned trial Court/Chief y FIR/complaint lodged against the State to seek redressal by filing an een allowed, pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA)
JUDGE
Yes/No
rved the erits wed hing hief t the g an n, if AMIT SHARMA 2026.02.19 16:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.