Harjit Singh vs State Of Punjab
2026 Latest Caselaw 3466 P&H

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 3466 P&H
Judgement Date : 18 April, 2026

[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Harjit Singh vs State Of Punjab on 18 April, 2026

               CRM-M-16866
                     16866-2026                              1


                                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
                                             AT CHANDIGARH
               216

                                                                 CRM
                                                                 CRM-M-16866-2026
                                                                 Date of decision: 18.04.2026


               HARJIT SINGH
                                                                                    ....Petitioner
                                                        Versus

               STATE OF PUNJAB
                                                                                   ....Respondent


               CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL

               Present:-          Mr. Ritesh Pandey, Advocate
                                  M
                                  for the petitioner.

                                  Mr. Amrit Pal Singh Gill, DAG, Punjab
                                                                 Punjab.

                                                        *****

               RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL, J. (ORAL)

1. Through the instant petition filed under Section 482 of the

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short "BNSS"), the petitioner

seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No.25 dated 22.01.2026 registered under

Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychot Psychotropic ropic Substances Act, 1985

(Section 29 of the NDPS Act added later on) at Police Station Civil Line

Batala, District Gurdaspur (Annexure P-1).

2. On 01.04.2026, the following order was passed by this Court: -

"Prayer Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.25 dated 22.01.2026 registered under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances

authenticity of this document.

CRM-M-16866

Act, 1985 (Section 29 of the NDPS Act added later on) at Police Station Civil Line Batala, District Gurdaspur (Annexure P P-1).

Brief facts as per the prosecution case are that on 22.01.2026, Inspector Manohar Singh along with fellow police officials was on a patrolling duty and on the basis of suspicion, apprehended one Karan Kumar @ Noni who was found in conscious possession of 8.31 grams of Heroin. Initially, the FIR in question was registered against the said co co-accused.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further contends that the petitioner was neither present at the spot, nor was named in the FIR and he has no concern with the said incident. He further contends that the petitioner has been nominated as an accused only on the basis of the disclosure nominated statement made by co-accused co accused Karan Kumar @ Noni. Apart from the disclosure statement, there is no other evidence to connect the petitioner with the offence in question and it is a trite law that disclosure disclosure statement of the co co-accused accused during his/her custodial interrogation is not admissible in evidence. No recovery is to be effected from the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation as and when called upon to do so by the investigating agency.

On the other hand, learned State counsel has filed the status report in the matter and while referring to the status report, has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bbail, ail, by submitting that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature.

Adjourned to 18.04.2026.

In the meantime, the petitioner is directed to join investigation within a week from today and would appear as and when required by the Investigating Officer and cooperate with the Investigating Agency. In the event of arrest, he shall be

admitted to interim interim bail on furnishing of bail/surety bonds to the

authenticity of this document.

CRM-M-16866

satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioners shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023."

2023.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in ccompliance ompliance

with the order dated 01.04.2026 passed by this Court, the petitioner has joined

the investigation. Hee has further argued that there is no connection between

the petitioner and the co-accused and that the petitioner is sought to be

implicated only on the basis of the disclosure statement of the co-accused.

4. Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from SI Gurmeet

Singh, has submitted that the petitioner has joined the investigation in terms

of interim order/protection earlier afforded to the petitioner and is no longer

required for further custodial interrogation. H He has however submitted that

since the FIR in question is under the NDPS Act of 1985, the petitioner ought

not to be extended ended the concession of anticipatory bail.

5. On a specific query put by this Court to the learned State counsel

as to whether, apart from the disclosure statement, any material has been

found during investigation to connect the petitioner with the recove recovered red

contraband, to which learned State counsel submitted that no material other

than disclosure statement has been found to connect the petitioner with either

the offence or the recovered contraband.

6. I have heard learned counsel for the rival parties and perused the

available record.

7. Further, the he Hon'ble Supreme Court while dealing with a plea for

grant of anticipatory bail in a case under NDPS Act, 1985; in a judgment

authenticity of this document.

CRM-M-16866

titled as 'Vijay Singh vs. The State of Haryana, bearing Special Leave to

Appeall (Crl.) No.(s)1266/2023 decided on 17.05.2023' has held as under:

"The petitioner is alleged to have committed offences under Sections 15 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter called the NDPS Act". His application for anticipatory bail was rejected by the High Court. The allegations allegations in the FIR are that 1.7 Kg of Poppy Straw (Doda Post) was recovered from the co co-accused.

accused. The petitioner concededly was not present at the spot but was named by the co co--

accused. That apart there is no other material to implicate the petitioner. The prosecution prosecution urges that another case with allegations of commission of offence under the NDPS Act are pending against the petitioner. It is not denied that in those proceedings he was granted bail. Having regard to these circumstances, the petitioner is directed to the enlarged on anticipatory bail, subject to such terms and conditions as the trial Court may impose. The petition is allowed. All pending applications are disposed of."

8. In the present case also, the the petitioner is sought to be arrayed

solely on the he basis of the disclosure statement of the co co-accused.

accused. Suffice to

say there is no other material available to connect the petitioner with the

recovered contraband. The veracity of the disclosure statement made by the

co-accused accused will be subject to comprehensive comprehensive scrutiny during the course of the

trial and the same cannot by itself be a ground to decline the concession of

anticipatory bail to the petitioner, petitioner especially when he has joined the

investigation in terms of interim order/protection protection granted by this C Court.

9. In view of the above, the petition is allowed and the interim

order dated 01.04.2026 passed by this Court is made absolute. The petitioner

authenticity of this document.