IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 211 CRM-M-20045-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: 06.05.2025. Bansi Lal ...Petitioner. Versus State of Haryana ...Respondent. *** CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUKHVINDER KAUR ....... Present: Mr. Narinder S. Lucky, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Karan Garg, DAG, Haryana. *** SUKHVINDER KAUR , J. (Oral) Present petition has been filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No.668 dated 15.12.2023, under Section 18(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (Section 27-A of N.I. Act, added later on), registered at Police Station Sadar, District Fatehabad. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has been arrayed as accused only on the basis of the disclosure statement of co- accused Rajinder Singh @ Jinder, which is not admissible in law. He has further contended that in FIR No.373 dated 15.12.2023, under Sections 18(c) and 27-A of NDPS Act, 1985, registered at Police Station City Ratia, District Fatehabad, Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has granted anticipatory bail to Bansi Lal (present petitioner), who was nominated as an accused on the disclosure statement of one Rajender Singh, from whom 256.21 grams opium was recovered. KOMAL 2025.05.06 17:09 I attest to the accuracy of this document CRM-M-20045-2025 (O&M) -2- Notice was issued in this case on 24.04.2025 and status report was called from the State, which was filed on 02.05.2025. As per the status report, call detail record of mobile number of co-accused Rajender Singh @ Jinder and of the petitioner were obtained. It was found that there was a telephonic conversation between these persons on 09.12.2023. Thus, besides the disclosure statement, some other material is also there, on the basis of which, the petitioner has been nominated as an accused in the present case. The petitioner is also involved in five other cases, out of which three cases are under NDPS Act. The custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required to trace the origin of the contraband In view of the above, no ground is made out to grant the petitioner concession of anticipatory bail. Dismissed. (SUKHVINDER KAUR) JUDGE 06.05.2025. Komal Whether speaking/reasoned? : Yes/ No Whether reportable? : Yes/ No KOMAL 2025.05.06 17:09 I attest to the accuracy of this document