AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
CRMCRM---MMM---4688446884---20262026
SUMEET GOELSUMEET GOEL, J., J., J. (ORAL)(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, in case FIR No.165 dated 20.07.2026, registered for offences punishable under Section 15(b) of the NDPS Act, 1985 (Section 27-A of the NDPS Act added later on), at Police Station City Ratia, District Fatehabad.
On 21.08.2026, the following order was passed:
““Apprehending his arrest in FIR No.165 dated 20.07.2026 registered for offences punishable under Section 15(b) and 27-A (added later on) of NDPS Act at Police Station City Ratia, District Fatehabad; the petitioner has preferred this petition under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking pre-arrest bail.
Counsel for the petitioner, 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’ble Supreme Court in ‘Vijay‘Vijay SinSingh versus The State of Haryana’gh versus The State of Haryana’ bearing Special Leave toSpecial Leave to AppealAppeal (Crl.)(Crl.) No(s).1266/2023,No(s).1266/2023 ‘State‘State byby (NCB)(NCB) BengaluruBengaluru vs.vs. PallulabidPallulabid Ahmad Arimutta &Ahmad Arimutta & Anr’ 2022(1) RCR (Criminal) 762, ‘Tofan Singh vs. State ofAnr’ 2022(1) RCR (Criminal) 762, ‘Tofan Singh vs. State of Tamil Nadu, AIR Tamil Nadu, AIR2020 Supreme Court 5592, ‘Smt. Najmunisha, Abdul Hamid2020 Supreme Court 5592, ‘Smt. Najmunisha, Abdul Hamid Chandmiya @Chandmiya @ Ladoo Bapu vs. State of Gujrat, Narcotics Control Bureau’ 2024Ladoo Bapu vs. State of Gujrat, Narcotics Control Bureau’ 2024 INSC 29INSC 29 and ‘Jugraj Singh Vs. State of Punjab’ bearing Special Leave to Appeal‘Jugraj Singh Vs. State of Punjab’Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.)No.9190/2025.(Crl.)No.9190/2025
Notice of motion.
On the strength of advance notice; Ms. Priyanka Sadar, Senior DAG, Haryana has entered appearance on behalf of the respondent-State of Haryana.
Adjourned to 16.09.2026.
State is at liberty to file reply, if so required.
The petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer on 26.08.2026 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.””
Learned State counsel (on instructions) has submitted that pursuant to the order dated 21.08.2026, the petitioner has joined investigation, cooperated therein and the petitioner is not required for custodial interrogation.
Keeping in view the factual milieu of the case in hand; especially the factum of the petitioner having joined investigation & cooperated therein, the petitioner 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 21.08.2026, in light of the dicta of judgment passed by this Court in CRMCRM---MMM---5403254032---2024 ‘Ashu Vs. State of2024 ‘Ashu Vs. State of Punjab’Punjab’ and the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in ‘JugrajJugraj SinghSingh Vs.Vs. StateState ofof HaryanaHaryana bearing SpecialSpecial LeaveLeave toto AppealAppeal (Crl.)(Crl.) No.9190/2025No.9190/2025.
Accordingly, the petition is allowed,allowed and the order dated 21.08.2026 granting interim anticipatory bail to the petitioner is hereby made absolute, subject to the conditions as enumerated under Section 482(2) of BNSS.
This order should not be treated as “blanket” order. It will not be read granting petitioner indefinite protection from arrest. It shall be confined to the FIR mentioned ibid and will not operate in respect of any other incident that involves commission of an offence.
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.
Needless to say that anything observed herein above shall not be construed to be an opinion on the merits of the case.
Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.