CRM-M-12862- 106 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Vivek Singh alias Atul Kumar State of Haryana CORAM : HON'BLE MS Present: Mr. MANDEEP PANNU J. 1. This is the first petition Cr.P.C) for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No.372, dated 14.08.2025 registered under Section 22 District Panchkula. 2. As per the case of the prosecutio the Investigating Officer along with other police officials was on patrolling duty near Bus Stand Pinjore when a secret information was received to the effect that one Gurmukh Singh son of Ram Singh was involved in the bu intoxicating pills and that he was present near the water tank at Village Manakpur carrying a red coloured bag containing narcotic tablets. Acting upon the said information, a notice under Section 42 of the NDPS Act was prepared and a rai was conducted. Notice under Section 50 of the NDPS Act was served upon him and his search was conducted in the presence of a Gazetted Officer, namely Sh. Ramanjit Singh, ETO, Panchkula. Upon sea Lomotil tablets were recovered, which on counting were found to be 1380 tablets -2026 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -.- CRM Date of Decision : Vivek Singh alias Atul Kumar VERSUS State of Haryana HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU Mr. Sutikshan Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. -.- MANDEEP PANNU J. (Oral) This is the first petition filed under Section 482 BNSS 2023 (438 Cr.P.C) for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No.372, dated 14.08.2025 registered under Section 22-C of NDPS Act, at Police Station Pinjore, District Panchkula. As per the case of the prosecution, on 14.08.2025 at about 5:30 PM, the Investigating Officer along with other police officials was on patrolling duty near Bus Stand Pinjore when a secret information was received to the effect that one Gurmukh Singh son of Ram Singh was involved in the bu intoxicating pills and that he was present near the water tank at Village Manakpur carrying a red coloured bag containing narcotic tablets. Acting upon the said information, a notice under Section 42 of the NDPS Act was prepared and a rai During the raid, the accused Gurmukh Singh was apprehended. Notice under Section 50 of the NDPS Act was served upon him and his search was conducted in the presence of a Gazetted Officer, namely Sh. Ramanjit Singh, ETO, Panchkula. Upon search of the red coloured bag carried by him, 23 strips of Lomotil tablets were recovered, which on counting were found to be 1380 tablets -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-12862-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision : 10.03.2026 ....Petitioner ....Respondent MANDEEP PANNU , Advocate for the petitioner. filed under Section 482 BNSS 2023 (438 Cr.P.C) for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No.372, dated C of NDPS Act, at Police Station Pinjore, n, on 14.08.2025 at about 5:30 PM, the Investigating Officer along with other police officials was on patrolling duty near Bus Stand Pinjore when a secret information was received to the effect that one Gurmukh Singh son of Ram Singh was involved in the business of selling intoxicating pills and that he was present near the water tank at Village Manakpur carrying a red coloured bag containing narcotic tablets. Acting upon the said information, a notice under Section 42 of the NDPS Act was prepared and a rai uring the raid, the accused Gurmukh Singh was apprehended. Notice under Section 50 of the NDPS Act was served upon him and his search was conducted in the presence of a Gazetted Officer, namely Sh. Ramanjit Singh, ETO, rch of the red coloured bag carried by him, 23 strips of Lomotil tablets were recovered, which on counting were found to be 1380 tablets filed under Section 482 BNSS 2023 (438 Cr.P.C) for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No.372, dated C of NDPS Act, at Police Station Pinjore, n, on 14.08.2025 at about 5:30 PM, the Investigating Officer along with other police officials was on patrolling duty near Bus Stand Pinjore when a secret information was received to the effect that siness of selling intoxicating pills and that he was present near the water tank at Village Manakpur carrying a red coloured bag containing narcotic tablets. Acting upon the said information, a notice under Section 42 of the NDPS Act was prepared and a raid uring the raid, the accused Gurmukh Singh was apprehended. Notice under Section 50 of the NDPS Act was served upon him and his search was conducted in the presence of a Gazetted Officer, namely Sh. Ramanjit Singh, ETO, rch of the red coloured bag carried by him, 23 strips of Lomotil tablets were recovered, which on counting were found to be 1380 tablets TRIPTI SAINI 2026.03.11 18:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-12862- of 2.5 mg each. The recovered tablets were taken into possession in accordance with law and the accused was formally ar 3. During the course of police remand, the main accused was interrogated and in his disclosure statement he named the present petitioner as the supplier of the recovered intoxicating tablets. It has further come on record that the petitioner and t company and the call detail records collected during investigation show frequent telephonic contact between them around the time of the alleged occurrence. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner c been falsely implicated on the basis of a disclosure statement of the co which is not admissible in evidence. It is further submitted that the petitioner was neither present at the spot nor any recovery has been effe argued that the only connecting material is the call detail record which by itself is insufficient to deny the concession of anticipatory bail. 5. Per contra reveals that the accused. The call detail records corroborate the disclosure statement and indicate continuous contact between the petitioner and the main accused. It is further argued that the offence falls commercial quantity and therefore the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are attracted. Custodial interrogation of the petitioner is stated to be necessary to unearth the larger supply chain. 6. I have 7. The recovery effected in the present case pertains to a large quantity of Lomotil tablets containing Diphenoxylate, which falls within the ambit of the -2026 (O&M) of 2.5 mg each. The recovered tablets were taken into possession in accordance with law and the accused was formally arrested. During the course of police remand, the main accused was interrogated and in his disclosure statement he named the present petitioner as the supplier of the recovered intoxicating tablets. It has further come on record that the petitioner and the main accused were working as drivers in a pharmaceutical company and the call detail records collected during investigation show frequent telephonic contact between them around the time of the alleged occurrence. earned counsel for the petitioner c been falsely implicated on the basis of a disclosure statement of the co which is not admissible in evidence. It is further submitted that the petitioner was neither present at the spot nor any recovery has been effe argued that the only connecting material is the call detail record which by itself is insufficient to deny the concession of anticipatory bail. Per contra, learned State counsel submits that the investigation reveals that the petitioner is the supplier of the contraband tablets to the main accused. The call detail records corroborate the disclosure statement and indicate continuous contact between the petitioner and the main accused. It is further argued that the offence falls under Section 22-C of the NDPS Act which involves commercial quantity and therefore the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are attracted. Custodial interrogation of the petitioner is stated to be necessary to unearth the larger supply chain. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. he recovery effected in the present case pertains to a large quantity of Lomotil tablets containing Diphenoxylate, which falls within the ambit of the -2- of 2.5 mg each. The recovered tablets were taken into possession in accordance rested. During the course of police remand, the main accused was interrogated and in his disclosure statement he named the present petitioner as the supplier of the recovered intoxicating tablets. It has further come on record that the he main accused were working as drivers in a pharmaceutical company and the call detail records collected during investigation show frequent telephonic contact between them around the time of the alleged occurrence. earned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated on the basis of a disclosure statement of the co-accused which is not admissible in evidence. It is further submitted that the petitioner was neither present at the spot nor any recovery has been effected from him. It is also argued that the only connecting material is the call detail record which by itself is insufficient to deny the concession of anticipatory bail. , learned State counsel submits that the investigation petitioner is the supplier of the contraband tablets to the main accused. The call detail records corroborate the disclosure statement and indicate continuous contact between the petitioner and the main accused. It is further C of the NDPS Act which involves commercial quantity and therefore the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are attracted. Custodial interrogation of the petitioner is stated to be necessary to heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. he recovery effected in the present case pertains to a large quantity of Lomotil tablets containing Diphenoxylate, which falls within the ambit of the of 2.5 mg each. The recovered tablets were taken into possession in accordance During the course of police remand, the main accused was interrogated and in his disclosure statement he named the present petitioner as the supplier of the recovered intoxicating tablets. It has further come on record that the he main accused were working as drivers in a pharmaceutical company and the call detail records collected during investigation show frequent ontends that the petitioner has accused which is not admissible in evidence. It is further submitted that the petitioner was cted from him. It is also argued that the only connecting material is the call detail record which by itself is , learned State counsel submits that the investigation petitioner is the supplier of the contraband tablets to the main accused. The call detail records corroborate the disclosure statement and indicate continuous contact between the petitioner and the main accused. It is further C of the NDPS Act which involves commercial quantity and therefore the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are attracted. Custodial interrogation of the petitioner is stated to be necessary to he recovery effected in the present case pertains to a large quantity of Lomotil tablets containing Diphenoxylate, which falls within the ambit of the TRIPTI SAINI 2026.03.11 18:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-12862- NDPS Act. At this stage, the disclosur with the call detail records showing telephonic contact between the petitioner and the main accused provide prima facie material connecting the petitioner with the alleged supply of the contraband. 8. It is well set particularly those relating to commercial quantity, the Court is required to exercise greater caution in granting anticipatory bail in view of the stringent conditions contained in Section 37 of the record a satisfaction that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the petitioner is not guilty of the alleged offence. in progress and the custodial interroga ascertain the source of supply and the possible involvement of other persons in the alleged illegal trade of narcotic substances. allegations, the nature of the offence and the ma investigation, this Court does not find it to be a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. nothing observed herein shall be construed as an expression on case. 9. All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed of. March 10, 2026 tripti Whether speaking/non Whether reportable -2026 (O&M) NDPS Act. At this stage, the disclosure statement of the main accused coupled with the call detail records showing telephonic contact between the petitioner and the main accused provide prima facie material connecting the petitioner with the alleged supply of the contraband. It is well settled that in cases involving offences under the NDPS Act, particularly those relating to commercial quantity, the Court is required to exercise greater caution in granting anticipatory bail in view of the stringent conditions contained in Section 37 of the NDPS Act. At this stage, the Court is unable to record a satisfaction that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the petitioner is not guilty of the alleged offence. Furthermore, the investigation is still in progress and the custodial interrogation of the petitioner may be necessary to ascertain the source of supply and the possible involvement of other persons in the alleged illegal trade of narcotic substances. In view of the seriousness of the allegations, the nature of the offence and the ma investigation, this Court does not find it to be a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Consequently, the present petition is nothing observed herein shall be construed as an expression on All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed of. Whether speaking/non-speaking : Speaking Whether reportable : Yes/No -3- e statement of the main accused coupled with the call detail records showing telephonic contact between the petitioner and the main accused provide prima facie material connecting the petitioner with the tled that in cases involving offences under the NDPS Act, particularly those relating to commercial quantity, the Court is required to exercise greater caution in granting anticipatory bail in view of the stringent conditions NDPS Act. At this stage, the Court is unable to record a satisfaction that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the Furthermore, the investigation is still tion of the petitioner may be necessary to ascertain the source of supply and the possible involvement of other persons in the In view of the seriousness of the allegations, the nature of the offence and the material collected during investigation, this Court does not find it to be a fit case for grant of anticipatory Consequently, the present petition is dismissed. However, nothing observed herein shall be construed as an expression on the merits of the All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed of. (MANDEEP PANNU) JUDGE : Speaking : Yes/No e statement of the main accused coupled with the call detail records showing telephonic contact between the petitioner and the main accused provide prima facie material connecting the petitioner with the tled that in cases involving offences under the NDPS Act, particularly those relating to commercial quantity, the Court is required to exercise greater caution in granting anticipatory bail in view of the stringent conditions NDPS Act. At this stage, the Court is unable to record a satisfaction that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the Furthermore, the investigation is still tion of the petitioner may be necessary to ascertain the source of supply and the possible involvement of other persons in the In view of the seriousness of the terial collected during investigation, this Court does not find it to be a fit case for grant of anticipatory However, the merits of the All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed of. TRIPTI SAINI 2026.03.11 18:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document