CRM-M-21484-2026(O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 206 CRM-M-21484-2026(O&M) Date of decision: 09.07.2026 Navdeep Singh … Petitioner Versus State of Haryana … Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH Present: Mr. Karanjeet Singh Brar, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Birender Bikram Attrey, Addl. AG, Haryana. *** SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (ORAL) 1. Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438 Cr.P.C.), is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder:- Name & age of Petitioner (s) FIR No. Date Sections(s) Police Station District Navdeep Singh, aged about 33 years 80 27.02.2026 15© of NDPS Act, 1985 Sadar Dabwali Sirsa 2. On 20.04.2026, following order was passed:- “The instant petition under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 (438 of Cr.P.C.), has been filed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.80 dated 27.02.2026, registered under Sections 15 (C) of NDPS Act, 1985, at Police Station Sadar Dabwali, District Sirsa. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case on the basis of the disclosure statement of a co-accused, wherein the RAJAN 2026.07.10 19:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-21484-2026(O&M) 2 petitioner has been alleged to be a proposed buyer of part of the contraband, i.e., 20 kilograms of Poppy Husk, out of total 51.705 Kilograms of Poppy Husk recovered from co-accused Gurwinder and Lucky. It is submitted that the petitioner has no connection with the said recovery and nothing has been recovered from his possession. There is no other evidence to prove complicity of petitioner, other than disclosure statement made by co-accused, which is inadmissible in evidence. It is also contended that the petitioner has clean and clear antecedents, and is not involved in any case of drug trafficking or any other criminal activity. The petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation, thus, learned counsel prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Notice of motion. Mr. Karan Veer Singh, Sr. DAG, Haryana, present in Court, accepted notice on behalf of the respondent-State and opposed the contentions raised by learned counsel for the petitioner by submitting that the present petitioner, along with the co-accused, were in constant touch with each other through mobile phone calls, and that the petitioner had made two calls on 14.02.2026. However, on a specific query put by the Court, learned State counsel fairly apprises that the alleged contraband was recovered on 27.02.2026, i.e., after a gap of 13 days from the phone calls made between the petitioner and co-accused. Learned State counsel sought time to file specific reply. In response, learned counsel for the petitioner clarified that the petitioner is engaged in the business of sale and purchase of second-hand cars. It is submitted that the co- accused had purchased a car, and the petitioner had acted as a witness in the said transaction. As the payment due to the petitioner was not made, the aforesaid calls were made in that regard. Heard. Taking into consideration the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, that the petitioner has been nominated on the basis of the disclosure statement; petitioner RAJAN 2026.07.10 19:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-21484-2026(O&M) 3 was neither in possession of the contraband, nor nominated as supplier, rather he is alleged to be the prospective purchaser of part of the contraband recovered from co-accused; petitioner has clean antecedents and is not involved in any other case, hence, the petitioner is directed to join the investigation as and when required by the Investigating Officer. In the event of arrest, the petitioner be released on interim bail on furnishing personal bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer till the next date of hearing subject to the conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of the BNSS (erstwhile Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.). Adjourned to 09.07.2026. Accordingly, State is directed to file reply, mentioning the following particulars in a tabulated form: .Role attributed to the petitioner. .Evidence collected regarding complicity of the petitioner. .Criminal antecedents of the petitioner. .Any other determining factor.” 3. Continuing his submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that in compliance of the order dated 20.04.2026, passed by the coordinate Bench, petitioner has joined the investigation, and has fully co- operated. Therefore, he prays for confirmation of the said interim anticipatory bail order. 4. Learned State counsel on instructions from ASI Swsewak Singh, confirms the said averment made by counsel for the petitioner of joining the investigation on 30.04.2026 by the petitioner, and submits that as of now, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required for the purpose of investigation. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties. RAJAN 2026.07.10 19:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-21484-2026(O&M) 4 6. Since, petitioner has already joined the investigation and custodial interrogation is no more required; ad-interim bail order dated 20.04.2026, passed by this Court is hereby made absolute. Accordingly, present petition is allowed. However, petitioner shall continue to join the investigation as and when required to do so and abide by all the terms and conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023. 7. Accordingly, petition stands disposed of. ( Sanjay Vashisth ) Judge 09.07.2026 Rajan Whether speaking / reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No RAJAN 2026.07.10 19:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document