IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Decided on : 25.03.2026 Uploaded on : 25.03.2026 Rahul ……Petitioner(s)

Versus State of Haryana ……Respondent(s)

CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. Kushager Goyal, Advocates for the petitioner (s).

Ms. Mahima Yashpal Singla, Senior DAG, Haryana.

*****

Sumeet Goel (Oral):

1. Apprehending his arrest in FIR No.16 dated 29.01.2026, registered for offences punishable under Section 21(B) of the NDPS Act, 1985 (Section 27A of the NDPS Act added later on), at Police Station Bhattu Kalan, District Fatehabad; the petitioner has preferred this petition under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking pre-arrest bail.

2. On 17.02.2026, the following order was passed:

“Apprehending his arrest in FIR No.16 dated 29.01.2026, registered for offences punishable under Section 21(B) of the NDPS Act, 1985 (Section 27A of the NDPS Act added later on), at Police Station Bhattu Kalan, District Fatehabad; the petitioner has preferred this petition under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking 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’ble Supreme Court in ‘Vijay Singh versus The State of Haryana’ bearing Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).1266/2023, ‘State by (NCB) Bengaluru vs. Pallulabid Ahmad Arimutta & Anr’ 2022(1) RCR (Criminal) (NCB) Bengaluru vs. Pallulabid Ahmad Arimutta & Anr’ 2022(1) RCR (Criminal) (NCB) Bengaluru vs. Pallulabid Ahmad Arimutta & Anr’ 2022(1) RCR (Criminal) (NCB) Bengaluru vs. Pallulabid Ahmad Arimutta & Anr’ 2022(1) RCR (Criminal) 762, ‘Tofan Singh vs. S 762, ‘Tofan Singh vs. State of Tamil Nadu, AIR 2020 Supreme Court 5592 tate of Tamil Nadu, AIR 2020 Supreme Court 5592, ‘Smt. Najmunisha, Abdul Hamid Chandmiya @ Ladoo Bapu vs. State of Gujrat, Najmunisha, Abdul Hamid Chandmiya @ Ladoo Bapu vs. State of Gujrat, Najmunisha, Abdul Hamid Chandmiya @ Ladoo Bapu vs. State of Gujrat, Najmunisha, Abdul Hamid Chandmiya @ Ladoo Bapu vs. State of Gujrat, Narcotics Control Bureau’ 2024 INSC 290 and ‘Jugraj Singh Vs. State of Haryana bearing Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.9190/2025.

Notice of motion.

On the strength of advance notice; Mr. Gurmeet Singh, AAG Haryana has entered appearance on behalf of the respondent – State of Haryana.

Adjourned to 17.03.2026.

The petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer on 21.02.2026 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 from ASI Mahabir) has submitted that the petitioner has joined investigation but his custodial interrogation is required for effecting recovery of money in question of Rs.9,000/-, which is stated to be drug money.

4. Keeping in view the factual milieu of the case in hand, especially the factum of the petitioner having joined investigation & cooperated therein and his custodial interrogation is required for effecting recovery of money in question of Rs.9,000/-, which is stated to be drug money and the petitioner being arrayed as an accused on the basis of disclosure statement, this Court is inclined to confirm the order dated 17.02.2026, in light of the dicta of the judgment passed by this Court in CRM-M-54