Punjab-Haryana High Court
Hardeep Singh vs State Of Punjab on 29 April, 2026
CRM-M-21477--2026 (O&M) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
(205) CRM-M-21477-2026 (O&M)
2026
Date of decision : 29.04.2026
HARDEEP SINGH
...
.. Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA
Present: Mr. Sukhdeep Singh Khaira, Advocate for the petitioner
Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab
***
MANISHA BATRA, J. (ORAL)
1. The instant one is the third petition filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short "BNSS") for grant of interim anticipatory bail in case arising out of FIR No.167 dated 15.07.2025 registered under Section 15 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (for short "NDPS Act") (Section 29 of the NDPS Act added later on) at Police Station Lehra, District Sangrur. The previous petitions as filed by him seeking pre-arrest pre arrest bail have been dismissed as withdrawn.
2. The aforementioned FIR was regist registered ered on the allegations that on 15.07.2025, on receipt of a secret information to the effect that the present petitioner was involved in sale of intoxicant tablets and on that very day also he was present near Tibbian Wala fields for selling intoxicant tab tablets, lets, while being accompanied with some other person, a raiding party was formed which reached AMIT SHARMA 2026.04.30 09:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.
CRM-M-21477--2026 (O&M) 2
at the informed place and found two persons sitting in a car. When the vehicle was tried to be stopped, both the occupants managed to flee by taking advantage off darkness by rushing towards the nearby paddy crop fields. On checking the vehicle, 72 Kgs of poppy husk was recovered from the boot of the car which was taken into possession.
3. As per the further allegations, during the course of investigation, it wass revealed that the above-mentioned car was owned by one Munish Kumar, who was joined into investigation and who disclosed that he had sold the said car which was recovered from the spot to the present petitioner for a sum of Rs.2,40,000/-.. He also showed WhatsApp chat betw between een the petitioner and himself made in this context. The petitioner was nominated as accused. Apprehending his arrest, he moved applications before the Sessions Court and then before this Court but he did not get any relief. Warrant of arrest issued against inst him. Proclamation proceedings have been initiated against him and the same was ordered to be issued for 04.04.2026.
4. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he had suffered a road accident on 07.03.2026 and has sustained serious ch chest est and abdominal trauma/injuries.
trauma . He has remained admitted in hospital and his is condition is critical. The findings given by the doctors are of suggestive of bowel perforation due to intestinal rupture and chest injury. He has got a major abdominal surgery. He requires further medical care and for that purpose, he deserves to be extended benefit of interim pre-arrest pre arrest bail. There is a substantial change in thee circumstances from the date of dismissal of his previous petitions AMIT SHARMA 2026.04.30 09:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.
CRM-M-21477--2026 (O&M) 3
which could not be foreseen by the petitioner. He is ready and willing to join the investigation and cooperate with the same as and when he becomes medically fit. It is, therefore, argued argued that the petition deserves to be allowed and he deserves to be extended benefit of interim bail.
5. Status report has been filed. Learned State counsel has argued that there are serious allegations against the petitioner as commercial quantity of contraband raband had been recovered from the vehicle which was owned and occupied by the petitioner at the time of recovery. He had managed to flee from the spot. He evaded his apprehension for long time. Even proclamation proceedings have been initiated against him. He has not been admitted in any hospital at present. The medical record produced by him is more than one month old. No exceptional or extra-ordinary extra ordinary circumstance for grant of interim bail is made out. There are no substantial changes in the circumstances circumstances from his earlier petitions. It is, therefore, argued that the petition does not deserve to be allowed.
6. This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties at considerable length.
7. The previous two petitions as filed by the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail had been dismissed as withdrawn. Now, he is making prayer for grant of interim anticipatory bail on the ground that he had met with a roadside accident and his condition is critical. Discharge summa summary ry of the petitioner as issued by the Park Hospital shows that he had admitted in the said hospital on 11.03.2026, but had left against medical medical advice on the same day day,, though hough from this record, it has been revealed that the petitioner had undergone a AMIT SHARMA 2026.04.30 09:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.
CRM-M-21477--2026 (O&M) 4
surgery ry and on account of injuries received by him in a roadside accident. The petitioner has also produced a copy of prescription issued by Janak Surgery Care and Ankur Advance Urology Centre showing that he has been advised some medicines,, however, the same does does not reveal that his condition is still critical or he is not capable of joining investigation proceedings by appearing before the Investigating Officer. The allegations against him are serious in nature. Taking into consideration the fact that no material material has been placed on record showing his recent medical condition, this Court is of the considered opinion that no compelling ground has been made out for exercising the powers under Section 482 of BNSS which are required to be exercised in exceptional and extra-- ordinary circumstances. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.
8. It is, however, clarified that the the observations made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion opinion on the merits of the case and shall not influence uence the outcome outcom of the trial.
9. Since the main petition pet has been dismissed dismissed, pending application, if any, is rendered infructuous.
(MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE 29.04.2026 Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Amit Sharma Whether reportable:- Yes/No AMIT SHARMA 2026.04.30 09:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.