Rajjat Alias Rajat vs State Of Punjab
2026 Latest Caselaw 2164 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Rajjat Alias Rajat vs State Of Punjab on 9 March, 2026

                           CRM-M-36289-2025                      1

                                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                                                     AT CHANDIGARH
                           107
                                                           CRM-M-36289-2025
                                                          Decided on: 09.03.2026

                           RAJJAT ALIAS RAJAT
                                                                                              ......Petitioner
                                                                     Versus
                           STATE OF PUNJAB
                                                                                             ......Respondent

                           CORAM:             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

                           Present:           Mr. Gurmeet Singh, Advocate, for
                                              Ms. Gurpreet Kaur, Advocate,
                                              for the petitioner.

                                              Mr. Neeraj Madaan, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

                                                                     ****

                           SANJAY VASHISTH, J.

1. Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of the BNSS,

2023 (earlier Section 438 Cr.P.C.), is for grant of anticipatory bail to the

petitioner, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First

Information Report, as detailed hereunder:-

Name of FIR Date Section(s) Police District Petitioner (s) No. Station Rajjat alias 72 16.05.2025 21 of NDPS Act Sadar Nawanshahr Rajat, aged (Sections 22, 29 of Nawanshahr about 27 NDPS Act added years later on)

2. On 11.07.2025, following order was passed:-

"2. Prosecution case is that from the possession of the main accused, i.e., Harpreet Singh @ Happy, there is recovery of 15 grams of 'Heroin', which is 'non- commercial quantity'. Subsequent to the registration of FIR, and arrest of the main accused - Harpreet Singh @ Happy, name of the petitioner has emerged through an alleged disclosure statement given by him. In the said disclosure statement, petitioner has been

detailed as a supplier of the contraband, which has already been recovered from the main accused.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that there is no other evidence with the prosecution, connecting the petitioner with the alleged crime. However, he expresses his inclination to join investigation, if protected from arrest. Thus, he prays for grant of concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the present case.

4. Notice of motion.

5. On advance notice, learned State counsel puts in appearance on behalf of the respondent - State, and seeks some time to respond to the submissions addressed by learned counsel opposite, after seeking instructions. And, in case of necessity, to file status report by verifying the submissions addressed by the petitioner's counsel.

6. Adjourned to 14.10.2025.

7. In the meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to join the investigation as and when required to do so by the Investigating Agency. In the event of his arrest, the petitioner shall be released on ad-interim bail, subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. The petitioner shall also be abide by all the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.).

8. Besides, it is directed that petitioner would hand over his passport to the Investigating Agency or to Court concerned, if he possesses. Otherwise, would submit an affidavit, disclosing the fact that he does not possess any passport. It is also directed that before leaving country any time during trial, petitioner would seek prior permission of the Court."

3. Continuing his submissions, learned counsel for the

petitioner contends that in compliance of the order dated 11.07.2025,

passed by this Court, petitioner has joined the investigation, and has fully

co-operated. Therefore, he prays for confirmation of the said interim

anticipatory bail order.

4. Learned State counsel on instructions from ASI

Mohinderpal, confirms the said averment made by counsel for the

petitioner of joining the investigation on 23.07.2025 by the petitioner,

and submits that as of now, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not

required for the purpose of investigation.

5. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

6. Since, petitioner has already joined the investigation and

custodial interrogation is no more required; ad-interim bail order dated

11.07.2025, passed by this Court is hereby made absolute. Accordingly,

present petition is allowed.

However, petitioner shall continue to join the investigation

as and when required to do so and abide by all the terms and conditions

laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023.

7. Accordingly, petition stands disposed of.

However, present order would be subject to the submission

of passport of the petitioner to the Investigating Agency or to Court

concerned, if he possesses, within a period of one week from today.

Otherwise, he would submit an affidavit, disclosing the fact that he does

not possess any passport.

It is clarified that in case, aforesaid condition is not complied

with, this order would be considered as non est automatically.

(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE 09.03.2026 Lavisha

Whether Speaking/Reasoned: YES/NO Whether Reportable: YES/NO