215 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA KAILASH ALIAS KAILASH CHANDER ALIAS KAILASH CHANDRA JAT STATE OF HARYANA CORAM: HON’BLE MR. Present: Mr. Mr. Vikas Bhardwaj, AAG, Haryana. HARPREET SINGH BRAR 1. Instant petition is preferred under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.337 dated 22.09.2019 under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, investigation, Section 18 of NDPS Act was deleted and Sections 18(b), 27 29 of NDPS Act were added), registered at Police Station Bhuna, District Fatehabad. 2. On IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH KAILASH ALIAS KAILASH CHANDER ALIAS KAILASH CHANDRA V/S HARYANA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Mr. Vishesh Bishnoi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Vikas Bhardwaj, AAG, Haryana. **** HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (ORAL) Instant petition is preferred under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.337 dated 22.09.2019 under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’) (during investigation, Section 18 of NDPS Act was deleted and Sections 18(b), 27 29 of NDPS Act were added), registered at Police Station Bhuna, District On 28.04.2025, following order was passed: “Instant petition is preferred under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) seeking anticipatory bail in 22.09.2019 under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Ac (during investigation, Section 18 of NDPS Act was deleted and Sections 18(b), 27-A, registered at Police Station Bhuna, District Learned counsel for the petitioner, IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-20937-2025 Date of decision: 23.05.2025 KAILASH ALIAS KAILASH CHANDER ALIAS KAILASH CHANDRA ...PETITIONER ...RESPONDENT HARPREET SINGH BRAR Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Vikas Bhardwaj, AAG, Haryana. Instant petition is preferred under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.337 dated 22.09.2019 under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’) (during investigation, Section 18 of NDPS Act was deleted and Sections 18(b), 27-A, 29 of NDPS Act were added), registered at Police Station Bhuna, District , following order was passed: petition is preferred under Section 482 of Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.337 dated 22.09.2019 under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’) investigation, Section 18 of NDPS Act was deleted A, 29 of NDPS Act were added), registered at Police Station Bhuna, District Fatehabad. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, MANISHA 2025.05.26 18:25 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment CRM-M-20937 20937-2025 2 contends that recovery of 02 kgs an falling within the ambit of noncommercial effected from co-accused Bhiyan Ram, who named accused Deva Ram and he further nominated the petitioner as accused in the FIR (supra recorded during the custodial disclosure statement has no evidentiary value in the eyes of law, as the same is hit by Section 25 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (now Section 23(1)(2) of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023). Further, the antecedents and is not involved in any other case. Furthermore, the petitioner is resident of Rajasthan and he was declared proclaimed offender by learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Fatehabad vide 04.12.2023. Thereafter, the Court seeking setting aside of the said order by way of filing CRM-M-18947-2025 05.04.2025 (Annexure P- the order dated 04.12.2023. Notice of motion for 23.05.2025. Keeping in view the ratio of law enunciated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in (2022) 10 SCC 51; Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra and others 2010 137; Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia etc. Vs. State of Punjab (19 2 SCC 565, Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273 and Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State of NCT Delhi 2020 (1) RCR (Criminal) 833, the before Investigating Officer within a period of from today and thereafte Officer. In the event of arrest, the petitioner will be admitted to interim anticipatory bail to the satisfaction of Investigating/Arresting petitioner shall cooperate with t Officer and abide by the conditions as provided under Section 482(2) of BNSS Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 recovery of 02 kgs and 500 grams of opium, falling within the ambit of noncommercial quantity, was accused Bhiyan Ram, who named co- accused Deva Ram and he further nominated the petitioner FIR (supra) in his disclosure statement ng the custodial interrogation. Such disclosure statement has no evidentiary value in the eyes of law, as the same is hit by Section 25 of Indian Evidence Section 23(1)(2) of Bharatiya Sakshya ). Further, the petitioner is having clean antecedents and is not involved in any other case. Furthermore, the petitioner is resident of Rajasthan proclaimed offender by learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Fatehabad vide order dated 04.12.2023. Thereafter, the petitioner approached this seeking setting aside of the said order by way of 2025 and vide order dated -2), this Court stayed operation of the order dated 04.12.2023. Notice of motion for 23.05.2025. g in view the ratio of law enunciated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. CBI Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra and others 2010 SCC OnLine SC 137; Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia etc. Vs. State of Punjab (1980) 2 SCC 565, Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC Aggarwal Vs. State of NCT Delhi 2020 (1) , the petitioner is directed to appear before Investigating Officer within a period of two weeks from today and thereafter, as directed by the Investigating In the event of arrest, the petitioner will be admitted to interim anticipatory bail on furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Investigating/Arresting Officer. The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation/Arresting and abide by the conditions as provided under Section 482(2) of BNSS (erstwhile Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973). MANISHA 2025.05.26 18:25 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment CRM-M-20937 3. Learned State counsel that in compliance of order dated petitioner has joined the investigation interrogation. 4. Keeping in view the statement made by learned the order dated 25.04.2025 terms and conditions enumerated in Section Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.) 5. The petition is accordingly disposed of. 6. Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed to be an expression of opinion by this Court lest it may trial Court is directed to proceed with the trial on its own merits, strictly in accordance with law. May 23, 2025 manisha (i) (ii) 20937-2025 3 If the Arresting Officer does not permit the petitioner to join the investigation, learned Illaqa Magistrate, who would Arresting Officer and direct him to join the petitioner in the investigation, in terms of the order of this Court. Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion by this Court and learned trial Court shall decide the case on its own accordance with law.” Learned State counsel, on instructions from that in compliance of order dated 28.04.2025 petitioner has joined the investigation and is not required for further custodial Keeping in view the statement made by learned 25.04.2025, is made absolute. The petitioner shall abide by the terms and conditions enumerated in Section 482(2) BNSS, 2023 Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.) The petition is accordingly disposed of. Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed to be an expression of opinion by this Court lest it may prejudice the trial. The learned trial Court is directed to proceed with the trial on its own merits, strictly in accordance with law. (HARPREET SINGH BRAR Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable If the Arresting Officer does not permit the investigation, he would appear before learned Illaqa Magistrate, who would then summon the Arresting Officer and direct him to join the petitioner in the investigation, in terms of the order of this Court. Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed as of opinion by this Court and learned trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits, strictly in on instructions from SI Ravinder, submits 28.04.2025 passed by this Court, the and is not required for further custodial Keeping in view the statement made by learned State Counsel, , is made absolute. The petitioner shall abide by the 482(2) BNSS, 2023 (Erstwhile The petition is accordingly disposed of. Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed to be an prejudice the trial. The learned trial Court is directed to proceed with the trial on its own merits, strictly in HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No MANISHA 2025.05.26 18:25 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment