IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 212 CRM-M-47557-2025 Date of decision: 25.09.2025 MADAN LAL ......Petitioner VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA .......Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ ***** Present: - Mr. Aakash Juneja, Advocate for the petitioner. (Through Video Conferencing). Ms. Chhavi Sharma, Asstt. A.G. Haryana. ***** VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral) The instant first petition is for seeking concession of anticipatory bail in case bearing FIR No. 137 dated 28.05.2025 registered under Sections 21-B/61/85 of the NDPS Act, at Police Station Sadar Rohtak. 2. The brief facts of the present case are that on 28.05.2025, PSI Ashish Kumar, along with HC Deepender (No. 1706/Rtk), EHC Zile (No. 2076/Rtk), and driver EHC Vikas (No. 1976), while on patrolling duty in Government vehicle No. HR-12GV-8215, was present at Jind Bypass, Rohtak. At that time, a special informant approached PSI Ashish Kumar and conveyed that one Manish, son of Karambir, resident of Rainakpura, District Rohtak, who was engaged in the sale of narcotics, was standing at Drain No. 8, Jind Road, near Village Sunderpur, with the intention of selling narcotic substances. The informant further described that the said person was wearing VISHAL SHARMA 2025.09.29 18:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-47557-2025 -2- a grey-coloured T-shirt and black-coloured lower, and could be apprehended with the contraband if a raid was conducted immediately. Upon receipt of this information, PSI Ashish Kumar informed his accompanying staff, prepared a notice under Section 42 of the NDPS Act, and sent EHC Zile (No. 2076) to Police Station Sadar, Rohtak, along with the daily diary report. Thereafter, PSI Ashish Kumar, along with the police party, proceeded to Drain No. 8, Jind Road, near Village Sunderpur, where a person matching the description was found standing suspiciously. He was overpowered with the assistance of the police staff and, upon inquiry, disclosed his identity as Manish, son of Karambir, resident of Rainakpura, District Rohtak. A notice under Section 50 of the NDPS Act was prepared and served which was duly signed by the accused, witnesses, and the police officials. On conducting a personal search in the presence of DSP Gulab, a plastic packet containing a yellow-coloured substance, identified as heroin (chitta), was recovered from the right pocket of the accused’s lower. The accused failed to produce any licence or permit for possession of such contraband. On weighing, the heroin was found to be 20 grams 55 milligrams. Samples were drawn, parcels of the samples and the remaining contraband were prepared, and the same were sealed with the seals of “AK” and “GS.” During interrogation, the accused Manish disclosed that the said heroin had been supplied to him by one Madan (petitioner in the present case) for the purpose of sale. On these allegations, the present FIR was registered. 3. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case on the VISHAL SHARMA 2025.09.29 18:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-47557-2025 -3- disclosure statement made by the co-accused from whose possession 20.55 grams of Heroin was recovered. It is submitted that the said accused has already been granted concession of regular bail vide order dated 30.07.2025. He thus submits that the petitioner be extended to concession of pre-arrest bail in the present case. 4. Reply by way of an affidavit of Gulab Singh, H.P.S. Deputy Superintendent of Police, City Rohtak has been filed in the Court today and the same is taken on record. It has been averred in the aforesaid reply that the co-accused was found to be in possession of Heroin as per the RFSL report dated 17.06.2025. There are various call details records of the co- accused Manish with the petitioner. It is further averred that another case bearing FIR No. 488 of 2002 was registered against the petitioner under Section 21, 29, 60 of the NDPS Act at Police Station Sampla which is fixed for 06.10.2025 for framing of charge. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respective parties. 6. Taking into consideration the antecedents of the petitioner and his repeated involvement in offences pertaining to Narcotic Trade, I do not deem it appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The petition is accordingly dismissed. (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) SEPTEMBER 25, 2025 JUDGE Vishal Sharma Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No VISHAL SHARMA 2025.09.29 18:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document