[Cites 6, Cited by 0]
Punjab-Haryana High Court
Mandeep Kumar vs State Of Haryana on 30 April, 2026
CRM-
CRM-M-16257-
16257-2026 1
204
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM-
CRM-M-16257-
16257-2026
Mandeep Kumar
....Petitioner
versus
State of Haryana
....Respondent
Date of Decision: April 30,
30, 2026
2026
Date of Uploading: April 30, 2026
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL
Present:
Present None for the petitioner.
Ms. Priyanka Sadar Thakur, Senior DAG Haryana.
*****
SUMEET GOEL,
GOEL, J. (ORAL)
Present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') for grant of
concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner
petitioner, in case FIR No.102 dated
07.03.2026, registered for offences
fences punishable under Section 21(b) of the
NDPS Act, 1985 (Section 27-A
27 A of the NDPS Act added later on), at Police
Station City Fatehabad.
2. On 25.03.2026, the following order was passed:
"Apprehending his arrest in FIR No.102 dated 07.03.2026,
registered for offences punishable under Section 21(b) of the NDPS Act,
1985 (Section 27-A A of the NDPS Act added later on), at Police Station
City Fatehabad; the petitioner has preferred this petition under Section 482
of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking pre pre-arrest bail.
Inter alia, contends that the petitioner is sought to be implicated
into the FIR in question solely on the basis of a disclosure statement made
by co-accused from whom the contraband in question has been allegedly
recovered & the petitioner is willing to join investigation and cooperate
therein. In order to buttress his arguments, learned counsel for the
petitioner has relied upon the dicta of the judgments of the Hon'b Hon'ble
le
Supreme Court in 'Vijay Singh versus The State of Haryana' bearing
authenticity of this order/ judgment
CRM-
CRM-M-16257-
No(s).1266/2023, 'State by (NCB)
Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).1266/2023
Bengaluru vs. Pallulabid Ahmad Arimutta & Anr' 2022(1) RCR
(Criminal) 762, 'Tofan Singh vs. State of Tamil Nadu, AIR 2020 Supreme
5592, 'Smt. Najmunisha, Abdul Hamid Chandmiya @ Ladoo Bapu
Court 5592
vs. State of Gujrat, Narcotics Control Bureau' 2024 INSC 290 and 'Jugraj
Jugraj
Singh Vs. State of Haryana bearing Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.)
No.9190/2025.
Notice of motion.
On the strength of advance notice; Ms. Mahima Yashpal Singla,
Senior DAG Haryana causes appearance and accepts notice on behalf of
the respondent - State of Haryana.
Put up on 30.04.2026
30.04.2026.
The petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer
on 01.04.2026 at 11:00 A.M. in concerned Police Station and join
investigation. In the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on
interim bail subject to his furnishing personal/surety bond(s) to the
satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer. As and when
further called by Investigating Officer, the petitioner shall join the
investigation. He shall abide by the condition(s) enumerated under Section
482(2) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023."
3. Learned State counsel (on instructions) has submitted that
pursuant to the order dated 25.03.2026, the petitioner has joined
investigation and his custodial interrogation is not required.
4. Keeping in view the factual milieu of the case in hand;
especially the factum of the petitioner having joined investigation, he is not
required for custodial interrogation, and he being arrayed as an accused on
the basis of disclosure statement; this Court is inclined to confirm the order
dated 25.03.2026, in light of the dicta of judgment passed by this Court in
CRM--M-54032
CRM 54032--2024 'Ashu Vs. State of Punjab' and the judgment passed
by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 'Jugraj Singh Vs. State of Haryana bearing
Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.9190/2025.
5. Accordingly, the petition is allowed,
allowed and the order dated
25.03.2026 granting interim anticipatory bail to the petitioner is hereby
made absolute, subject to the conditions as enumerated under Section 482(2)
of BNSS.
6. This order should not be treated as "blanket" order. It will not
be read granting petitioner indefinite protection from arrest. It shall be
authenticity of this order/ judgment
CRM-
CRM-M-16257-
confined to the FIR mentioned ibid and will not operate in respect of any
other incident that involves commission of an offence.
7. Liberty is reserved in favour of State/complainant to move for
cancellation/recall of this order in case the petitioner violates any condition
stipulated under Section 482(2) of BNSS or upon showing any other
sufficient cause.
8. Needless to say that anything observed herein above shall not
be construed to be an opinion on the merits of the case.
9. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
(SUMEET GOEL)
JUDGE
April 30, 2026
mahavir
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
authenticity of this order/ judgment
