CRM-M-11511-2026 1 210 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-11511-2026 DECIDED ON: 14.07.2026 HARDEEP SINGH .....PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB .....RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH. Present: Mr. Vivek Singla, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Manjinder Singh Bhullar, DAG, Punjab. SANJAY VASHISTH, J (ORAL) 1. Present petition has been filed by the petitioner, seeking grant of anticipatory bail, in case, FIR No.0060, dated 17.08.2025, under Section 22 of NDPS Act, and section 223 of BNS (erstwhile section 188 IPC) (offence under section 29 of NDPS Act added later on), registered at Police Station Tallewal, District Barnala. 2. After hearing the submissions addressed by counsel for the petitioner, on 27.02.2026, following order was passed:- “Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that petitioner has been falsely involved in the present case merely on the statement of a stranger i.e. one Jagtar Singh, who is neither the secret informer nor the accused in the present FIR; nothing has been recovered from the petitioner; the petitioner has not been named as a supplier of the contraband but a simple and bald allegation has been levelled against him that he is involved in drug trafficking. Learned Judge, Special Court, Barnala has not considered the factual matrix of the present case and dismissed the application seeking anticipatory bail of the petitioner. LAVISHA 2026.07.15 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh CRM-M-11511-2026 2 Moreover, the petitioner is not involved in any other criminal case. Learned State counsel appeared on advance notice and requested a short adjournment to file response as he has not received the proper instructions from the quarter concerned. Adjourned to 22.04.2026. Till then, no coercive action be taken against the petitioner. The reply/status report shall also mention the following details in tabular form under headings: 1. Role of the petitioner in commission of crime; 2. Antecedents of the petitioner and 3. Evidence collected against the petitioner.” 3. Counsel for the petitioner, submits that petitioner is ready to join the investigation and fully cooperate, if protected from arrest by this Court. Thus, counsel prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the present case. 4. This Court has heard the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and has also perused the record available before it. 5. During the course of hearing, learned State counsel was unable to point out any material on record indicating the presence of petitioner on the spot. Furthermore, it remains a debatable issue whether substance allegedly recovered from the main accused would attract the provisions of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, or the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. Insofar as recovery of 200 loose tablets of Alprazolam is concerned, the same admittedly falls within the category of non-commercial quantity. 6. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court does not find it necessary to keep the present petition pending any further and, accordingly, deems it appropriate to dispose of the same, with the direction to the petitioner to join the investigation within two LAVISHA 2026.07.15 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh CRM-M-11511-2026 3 weeks from today or as and when called by the investigating officer, and in the eventuality of the arrest, petitioner would be released on anticipatory bail, subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. The petitioner shall also be abide by all the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.). 7. Besides, it is directed that petitioner would hand over his passport to the Investigating Agency or to Court concerned, if he possesses. Otherwise, would submit an affidavit, disclosing the fact that he does not possess any passport. It is also directed that before leaving country any time during trial, petitioner would seek prior permission of the Court. 8. However, it is clarified that this order shall be deemed inoperative, if the petitioner fails to join and cooperate with the investigation, in terms of the directions mentioned in the present order. 9. With the directions recorded here above, present petition stands disposed of. (SANJAY VASHISTH) 14.07.2026 JUDGE Lavisha Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No LAVISHA 2026.07.15 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh