CRM-M-36394-2026 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA CHANDIGARH CRM-M-36394-2026 (O&M) Reserved on: 27.07.2026 Pronounced on: 29.07.2026 Uploaded on: 29 .07.2026 Shiv Parkash …Petitioner V/S State of Haryana …Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL Present: Mr. Vishal Sharda, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Kanica Sachdeva, DAG, Haryana.**** SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL J. 1. Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case arising out of FIR No.413 dated 04.06.2026, under Sections 26(c)/61/85 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985 and Section 42 of Prisons Act, 1894, Police Station Civil Line, Sirsa, District Sirsa. This is the first petition for anticipatory bail. 2. As per allegations, on 04.06.2026 at about 11:00 AM, secret information was received by jail authorities that under trial prisoner Lakhbir Singh son of Sant Singh alias Janta Singh, lodged in case FIR No.251/2024, under Sections 115, 118 and 126 of BNS, Police Station Kalanwali, had entered the jail day before with prohibited item. Accordingly, physical search of Lakhbir Singh was conducted and a long cylindrical packet wrapped in black tape was recovered from his undergarment. The prisoner disclosed that the packet contained Buprenorphine intoxicating pills which he had smuggled inside by concealing in his body KAPIL 2026.07.29 12:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-36394-2026 (O&M) 2 cavity. He further disclosed that the pills were to be delivered to other two under trial prisoners namely, Ram Kumar son of Dalip Singh and Sandeep alias Seepa son of Jagga Singh. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was innocent and had been falsely implicated. He was not named in the FIR and was roped in on the basis of disclosure statement of co-accused Lakhbir Singh, though there was nothing to link him with the recovery. Whether or not, he was indeed the supplier of the contraband was a matter of evidence. The disclosure statement of co-accused was inadmissible in evidence. Petitioner was ready and willing to join investigation as and when required by the police. Therefore, he deserved to be enlarged on anticipatory bail. 4. Status report by way of affidavit of Deputy Superintendent of Police (HQ), Sirsa, has been filed by learned State counsel, which is taken on record. She opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail on the ground that during investigation, petitioner was found involved in the commission of crime on the basis of disclosure statement suffered by co-accused Lakhbir Singh @ Laddu. It was he who had supplied the intoxicating tablets of Buprenorphine to the co-accused for delivery to his brother Ram Kumar who too, was confined in District Jail Sirsa. The investigation established his active, conscious and direct involvement in procurement of commercial quantity of contraband. Moreover, he was habitual offender, involved in other criminal cases. KAPIL 2026.07.29 12:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-36394-2026 (O&M) 3 5. The quantity of contraband allegedly recovered from possession of co-accused Lakhbir Singh is 36.25 grams of Buprenorphine pills which is commercial quanity. As per status report filed by the police, petitioner is involved in following five cases:- (i) FIR No.283 dated 07.12.2012, under Sections 382, 506, 34 IPC, Police Statin Sadar Dabwali, in which petitioner/accused is acquitted vide judgment dated 07.11.2015. (ii) FIR No.489 dated 08.11.2022, under Sections 294, 506, 34 IPC, Police Station Sadar Dabwali, which is pending in the learned Trial Court for 11.08.2026 for prosecution witnesses. (iii) FIR No.134 dated 15.05.2025, under Sections 21- B/61/85 NDPS Act, Police Station Sadar Dabwali, which is pending in the learned Trial Court for 28.07.2026 for appearing. (iv) FIR No.63 dated 08.03.2025, under Section 21- B/61/85 NDPS Act, Police Sadar Dabwali, in which petitioner/accused was granted interim relief by this Court vide order dated 23.05.2025. (v) FIR No.102 dated 18.03.2026, under Section 21- B/61/85 NDPS Act, Police Station Sadar Dabwali, which is pending in the learned Trial Court for 22.10.2026 for appearance. KAPIL 2026.07.29 12:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-36394-2026 (O&M) 4 6. Since the offence alleged to have been committed by the petitioner involves commercial quantity of narcotic drugs, there is a specific embargo on the grant of bail in such matters, enacted under Section 37 of the NDPS Act which makes it mandatory for the Court to record a satisfaction on the twin requirements viz that there exists reasonable grounds to believe that the applicant is not guilty of the alleged offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. Considering involvement of the petitioner in other cases under the NDPS Act, no such satisfaction can be recorded. 7. Even though, petitioner has been nominated as accused on disclosure statement of co-accused, his custodial interrogation would be necessary to ascertain the source of contraband, to identify unknown associates of the petitioner and to unearth the narcotic network. Grant of anticipatory bail at this crucial stage of the case would adversely affect the investigational powers of the police. 8. Considering the nature and gravity of the offence, the commercial quantity of contraband involved, there are no exceptional grounds to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The petition for anticipatory bail is accordingly declined. (SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL) 29.07.2026 JUDGE Kapil Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No KAPIL 2026.07.29 12:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document