CRM-M-40076-2026 (O&M) 1 AT CHANDIGARH. 216 CRM-M-40076-2026 (O&M). Date of Decision: 28.07.2026. Irshad ....Petitioner. VERSUS State of Haryana ....Respondent. *** CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH --- Present: Mr. Devanand Prasad, Advocate for the petitioner. **** SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral) On a call given by the Executive Committee of the Punjab and Haryana High Court Bar Association, the Members of the Bar have suspended the work from 28.07.2026 (Post Lunch) till 30.07.2026 in protest against the implementation of the Legal Aid Defence Counsel (LADC), Policy. 1. Petitioner-Irshad, aged about 24 years, has filed the present petition under Section 483 of BNSS (corresponding Section 439 Cr.P.C.) seeking regular bail in case FIR No.712 dated 26.12.2025 under Sections 20(c) and 29 of NDPS Act, registered at Police Station Sector 58, Faridabad. 2. Case of the prosecution is that, while the police party was on patrolling duty, it received secret information pursuant to which it reached near JCB Company, Sector 58, Faridabad. As per the information received, Wagon R car bearing registration No. HR55-AW-3963 was occupied by three persons, who upon inquiry disclosed their names as (i) Shahrukh, resident of Aligarh (U.P.); (ii) Nazim, resident of Bulandshahr (U.P.); and (iii) Afsar, resident of Faridabad. JITENDER 2026.07.29 14:11 I attest to the accuracy of this document CRM-M-40076-2026 (O&M) 2 In the presence of Sh. Vivek Kund, HPS, Assistant Commissioner of Police, Mujesar, Faridabad, a search of the vehicle was conducted, during which two white plastic sacks were found lying on the rear seat of the car. Upon weighing, one plastic sack was found to contain 11.26 kg of ganja, whereas the other plastic sack was found to contain 10.116 kg of ganja, making the total recovery 21.142 kg of ganja along with the plastic sacks. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was neither named in the FIR nor his name is disclosed by the secret informer. It is argued that only after registration of the FIR and arrest of the named accused, name of petitioner is surfaced on the basis of a disclosure statement. It is further submitted that name of petitioner cropped up in the disclosure statement of accused-Shahrukh, who was named in the FIR itself and except of the said disclosure statement, no other material could be collected against the petitioner. Thus, learned counsel contends that the case of the prosecution is improbable in nature and that, except for the disclosure statement of co- accused Shahrukh, no other incriminating material is collected by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation. Co-accused Anuj Kumar has already been granted regular bail by this Court, vide order dated 29.05.2026 (Annexure P-4). Accordingly, counsel prays for grant of regular bail to the petitioner. 4. On the other hand, ASI Bhupender, Police Station Sector 58, Faridabad has filed custody certificate dated 27.07.2026, which is taken on record. 5. I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the JITENDER 2026.07.29 14:11 I attest to the accuracy of this document CRM-M-40076-2026 (O&M) 3 petitioner and also perused the relevant material available on record. 6. Keeping in view the fact that petitioner is in custody since 27.12.2025, i.e., for a period of seven months and except the present case, there is no other case against the petitioner under NDPS Act, process of recording of statement of prosecution witnesses is yet to start and co-accused Anuj Kumar has already been extended concession of regular bail, this Court finds merit in the prayer for bail. Thus, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, and considering the totality of the circumstances, petitioner is held entitled to the concession of regular bail. Consequently, present petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, subject to his furnishing bail/ surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/ Chief Judicial Magistrate/Illaqa Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case. 7. Any of the discussion done and recorded hereabove, shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the facts of the case. Therefore, trial Court is expected to decide the case by taking an independent view, on the basis of evidence available on record, as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law. 8. Petition stands disposed of. Misc. application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE 28.07.2026 jitender Whether speaking/ reasoned : Yes/ No Whether Reportable : Yes/ No JITENDER 2026.07.29 14:11 I attest to the accuracy of this document