CRM-M-9473-20 IN THE H (214) SACHIN THAKU 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 added later on) at P 2. As pe Naharwal was app 150 grams of ch Mphetamine) had into custody. Th 2026 (O&M) 1 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB A CHANDIGARH HAKUR Versus HARYANA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANIS Dhruv Gupta, Advocate for the p 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 nder Sections 22(c) and 20(b)(ii)(B c Substances Act (for short “NDPS A on) at Police Station Chandimandir, Di As per the allegations on 11.07.2025 as apprehended on the basis of a secre of charas and 23 grams of MDM e) had been effected from his consciou y. The above-said accused was for JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH CRM-M-9473-2026 (O&M) Date of decision : 28.04.2026 ... Petitioner ...Respondent ANISHA BATRA r the petitioner preferred by the petitioner under a Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) ut of FIR No.299 dated 11.07.2025 )(ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and PS Act”) (Section 29 of NDPS Act dir, District Panchkula. 7.2025, the accused Harsh Vardhan cret information and recovery of MDMA (Methylene Dioxy Metha nscious possession which was taken as formally arrested. The accused 2026 oner dent nder SS”) 2025 and Act dhan ry of etha aken used AMIT SHARMA 2026.04.29 10:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-9473-20 Harsh Vardhan Na purchased MDMA an additional acc stands concluded. 3. It is a falsely implicated cannot be conside since long. No r record to show tha detention would n time to conclude. argued that the pet 4. Per c the gravity of the deserve to be exte does not deserve to 5. This C for the parties at co 6. The p to the co-accused disclosed by the co contraband from 2026 (O&M) 2 han Naharwal suffered disclosure state DMA from the present petitioner. Th al accused. He was arrested on 17 luded. It is argued by learned counsel for t licated in this case on the basis of st onsidered to be legally admissible in No recovery had been effected fro ow that he had any connection with t ould not serve any useful purpose. T clude. He is not required for further the petition deserves to be allowed. Per contra, learned State counsel has of the allegations as levelled agains e extended benefit of bail. It is, there erve to be allowed. This Court has heard the rival submis es at considerable length. The petitioner is alleged to have supp cused which is commercial quantity. the co-accused. As per his disclosure from the petitioner. In Tofan Sing re statement to the effect that he had er. The petitioner was nominated as on 17.07.2025. Investigation now l for the petitioner that he has been s of statement of co-accused which ible in evidence. He is in custody ed from him. There is nothing on with the co-accused. His continued se. The trial will take considerable urther investigation. It is, therefore, sel has argued that keeping in view against the petitioner, he does not , therefore, stressed that the petition ubmissions made by learned counsel pplied the recovered contraband The name of the petitioner was losure statement, he had sourced the Singh Vs. State of Tamil Nadu, had ed as now been hich tody g on nued rable fore, view not tition unsel band was d the du, AMIT SHARMA 2026.04.29 10:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-9473-20 (2021) 4 SCC 1, statements made u unless corroborat disclosure stateme trial, however, at effected from the p nothing on record crime or to show the relevant time. take considerable circumstances, thi would be served consideration the comments on the manner, the petiti bail, subject to his learned trial Court 7. It is, be construed as an and shall not influ 8. In the petitioner, it shall application seekin 2026 (O&M) 3 1, it was observed by Hon’ble A ade under Section 67 of NDPS Act oborated by independent material. tatement against the petitioner will b er, at this stage, it cannot be ignore m the petitioner. The petitioner was ar record, at this stage, to connect the pe show that he was connected with the time. Investigation has been complet erable time to conclude. Keeping in , this Court is of the considered o erved by keeping the petitioner in c the above discussed facts but wit n the merits of the case lest the s petition is allowed and the petitione to his furnishing personal and surety b Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty It is, however, clarified that the obse d as an expression of opinion of this C t influence the outcome of the trial in a In the event of there being any FIR t shall be open to the respondent-State seeking cancellation of bail. ’ble Apex Court that the disclosure S Act, are inadmissible in evidence terial. While the veracity of the will be tested during the course of ignored that no recovery has been was arrested on 17.07.2025. There is the petitioner either with the subject ith the co-accused in any manner at ompleted. Conclusion of trial would ing in view the aforesaid facts and ered opinion that no useful purpose er in custody anymore. Taking into t without meaning to make any the same prejudice the trial in any titioner is ordered to be released on urety bonds to the satisfaction of the /Duty Magistrate concerned. e observations made above shall not this Court on the merits of the case ial in any manner. y FIR/complaint lodged against the State to seek redressal by filing an sure ence the se of been re is bject er at ould and pose into any any d on f the l not case t the g an AMIT SHARMA 2026.04.29 10:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-9473-20 9. Since any, is rendered in 28.04.2026 Amit Sharma 2026 (O&M) 4 Since the main petition has been all ered infructuous. (MA Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes Whether reportable:- Yes/No allowed, pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE Yes/No n, if AMIT SHARMA 2026.04.29 10:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.