CRM-M-5117-2026 - 1- 232 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-5117-2026 Date of Decision: 03.07.2026 Ajmer Singh @ Sabba …Petitioner vs. State of Punjab …Respondent Coram : Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.S.Shekhawat Present : Mr. Ritesh Pandey, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sartaj Singh Gill, Sr. DAG, Punjab. *** N.S.Shekhawat J. (Oral) 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with a prayer to grant anticipatory bail to him in case FIR No.8 dated 14.01.2026, registered under Sections 21, 27-A of NDPS Act (later on Section 29 of NDPS Act was added), at Police Station Sadar Batala, District Batala. 2. The FIR in the present case was registered on the basis of the statement made by ASI Anand Singh and the same has been reproduced below:- “To the Station House Officer, Police Station Sadar Batala, "Jai Hind". Today, I, the undersigned ASI, along with LR/ASI Rakesh Kumar 3379/Batala, HC Vikram 3028/Batala, PHG Malkit Singh 2015, while on board the official vehicle No. PB-65-BG- 7380, driven by LR/ASI Kulwinder Singh 2245/Batala, and equipped with a laptop, printer, investigation kit, and drug kit, had HEMLATA 2026.07.06 17:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-5117-2026 - 2- set out for patrolling and search of miscreants and suspicious persons and vehicles within the jurisdiction of the police station. When the police party, during patrolling, reached near the mobile tower in the village of Dhadiala Natt, a clean-shaven young man was seen approaching on foot from the direction of the Dhadiala Natt farm houses. Upon seeing the police party's vehicle, he abruptly turned back and was about to take out and throw an object wrapped in a polythene bag from the right pocket of his black-coloured jacket, when I, the ASI, with the help of the accompanying officials, apprehended him with great alacrity. After making him stand to one side, his name and address were enquired. Upon being asked, he stated his name as Akasdeep Singh alias Kalu son of Iliyas alias Bitta, resident of Jaitipur, Police Station Kathunangal. I, the ASI, introduced myself by my rank and posting and informed him that I suspect him of being in possession of a narcotic substance and that a search of his person and the polythene bag held in his hand is to be conducted. However, he has a legal right to have his search conducted before a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate, whom I can summon to the spot or take him to their presence. To this, he stated, "I have faith in you; you may conduct the search of my person and the polythene bag held in my hand." Thereupon, I, the ASI, prepared a separate consent memo of the for further investigations /- Anand Singh ASI Police Station Sadar Batala Dated 14.01.2026.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that in the present case, Akashdeep alias Kalu, co-accused was arrested by the police and 6 gm of heroin was recovered from him. The petitioner has been nominated as an accused on the basis of the disclosure statement made by Akashdeep @ Kalu, co-accused and he has been nominated as an accused in the present case with the aid of Section 29 of the NDPS Act. He further submits that the petitioner was HEMLATA 2026.07.06 17:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-5117-2026 - 3- involved in one more case of similar nature i.e. FIR No.89 dated 18.08.2024 under Sections 22/29-61-85 of NDPS Act, Police Station Sadar Batala and he is on bail in the said case. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner is a habitual offender and is involved in one more case of similar nature. He further submits that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required to know the source of such contraband and also to ascertain the involvement of other accused. Learned State counsel has also relied upon the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of “State of Haryana Vs Samarth Kumar”, 2022(3) RCR (Crl.) 991, wherein, it has been observed as follows:- “8. In cases of this nature, the respondents may be able to take advantage of the decision in Tofan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu (supra), perhaps at the time of arguing the regular bail application or at the time of final hearing after conclusion of the trial. 9. To grant anticipatory bail in a case of this nature is not really warranted. Therefore, we are of the view that the High Court fell into an error in granting anticipatory bail to the respondents.” 5. From the perusal of record, it is apparent that the petitioner even though was not named in the FIR, but sufficient incriminating evidence has been collected against him during the course of investigation. Even, the petitioner was found involved in one more case under the provisions of the NDPS Act. Consequently, in the considered opinion of this Court, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner would be required to know the modus operandi, HEMLATA 2026.07.06 17:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-5117-2026 - 4- names of the other persons involved in the crime and the source of supply of the contraband as well. Moreover, the cases under the provisions of NDPS Act are on the rise in the State of Punjab and the accused, who are involved in more than one case, can never be granted the concession of anticipatory bail. 6. In view of the above discussion, this Court finds no merit in the present petition and accordingly, the same is hereby dismissed. (N.S.SHEKHAWAT) 03.07.2026 JUDGE hemlata Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No HEMLATA 2026.07.06 17:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document