Shivam Bhardwaj vs State Of Haryana
2026 Latest Caselaw 1294 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Shivam Bhardwaj vs State Of Haryana on 11 February, 2026

CRM-M-6923-2026 (O&M)                   1




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
                         AT CHANDIGARH

217
                                                        CRM-M-6923-2026 (O&M)
                                                        Date of decision: 11.02.2026


Shivam Bhardwaj
                                                                         ....Petitioner

                                     Versus

State of Haryana
                                                                        ...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY
                                   *****
Present : Mr. Partap Singh and Mr. Manav Sharma, Advocates
          for the petitioner

       Mr. Gautam Kaile, DAG Haryana
                            *****
AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL)

1. Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 483 BNSS is for

grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.224 dated 08.06.2025,

registered under Sections 18(b) and 29 of NDPS Act at Police Station Pundri,

District Kaithal.

2. Learned counsel contends that the petitioner has been in custody

for merely 8 months. As per the allegations, the alleged recovery of 2 kg and

608 grams of opium was effected from him. Co-accused Vijay Kumar and Vijay

have been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 19.01.2026 &

24.12.2025, Annexures P-3 and P-4 respectively. Challan was presented on

04.12.2025 and charges have been framed on 15.01.2026, however, out of 15

prosecution witnesses, none has been examined. The petitioner is involved in 2

more cases under NDPS Act, wherein he is on bail. Reliance is placed on the

1 of 4

judgment passed by Hon'ble The Supreme Court titled as Maulana Mohd.

Amir Rashadi vs. State of U.P. and others, 2012(2) SCC 382.

3. The custody certificate dated 10.02.2026, filed by the learned State

counsel is taken on record. As per the same, the petitioner is behind bars for 7

months and 29 days.

4. Learned State counsel opposes the bail on the ground that the

commercial quantity of contraband was recovered from the petitioner, who was

apprehended at the spot. However, he is unable to controvert the submissions

with regard to stage, co-accused having been granted bail and the petitioner

being on bail in other cases.

5. Heard.

6. Hon'ble The Supreme Court in the case of Maulana Mohd. Amir

Rashadi (Supra)had held that, "As observed by the High Court, merely on the

basis of criminal antecedents, the claim of the second respondent cannot be

rejected. In other words, it is the duty of the Court to find out the role of the

accused in the case in which he has been charged and other circumstances such

as possibility of fleeing away from the jurisdiction of the Court, etc."

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in particular

that the petitioner is in custody for the last 7 months and 29 days; on bail in

other cases; co-accused are on bail; challan stands presented on 04.12.2025 and

charges have been framed on 15.01.2026, however, prosecution evidence is yet

to commence, the trial is likely to take a considerable time, further incarceration

of the petitioner would be violative of his right enshrined under Article 21 of the

Constitution of India, the present petition is allowed.

2 of 4

8. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail, subject to

furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of trial Court/Duty Magistrate

concerned, if not required in any other case and shall abide by the following

conditions:-

(i) The petitioner will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

(ii) The petitioner will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

(iii) The petitioner will appear before the trial Court on each and every date fixed, unless is exempted by a specific order of Court.

(iv) The petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which, he is an accused, or for commission of which he is suspected of.

(v) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly coerce, induce, threaten or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/ her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence in any manner.

(vi) The petitioner shall not in any manner misuse his liberty.

(vii) The petitioner shall furnish his address and mobile number by way of an affidavit to the trial Court and not change the same till conclusion of trial and if for any reasons, he seeks to change either of the aforesaid, it shall be done only with prior information to the learned trial Court.

(viii) The petitioner shall not leave the country without prior permission of the trial Court.

(ix) The trial Court/Duty Magistrate may impose any other condition, as deemed appropriate while releasing the petitioner.

9. It is made abundantly clear that in case there is any breach of the

aforesaid conditions, the State shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail as

granted to the petitioner by this order.

10. In view of the above, it is clarified that the observations made

3 of 4

herein above are limited for the purpose of present proceedings and would not

be construed as any opinion on the merits of the case and the trial would

proceed independently of the aforesaid observations.

                                                  (AMAN CHAUDHARY)
                                                        JUDGE
11.02.2026
M.Kamra

      Whether speaking/reasoned               :      Yes / No
      Whether reportable                      :      Yes / No




                                  4 of 4