IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

202 CRM-M-8569-2025 Decided on : 01.07.2025 Raj Kumar alias Paiya . . . Petitioner(s)

Versus State of Haryana . . . Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH PRESENT: Mr. Narender Pal Bhardwaj, Advocate and Ms. Muskan, Advocate for the petitioner(s).

Mr. Dharam Pal, AAG, Haryana.

****

SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral)

1. At the outset, learned State counsel has filed the custody certificate dated 01.07.2025 and medical status report dated 30.06.2025 by way of affidavit of Satvinder Kumar, Superintendent, Central Jail, Ambala, in Court today. Same are taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. Office to tag the same at appropriate place.

Copies thereof have been handed over to the counsel for the petitioner.

2. The instant petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C.), for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, during the pendency of trial, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder:-

Name of Petitioner(s) FIR Date Section(s) Police Station District No.

Raj Kumar alias Paiya 231 30.07.2024 21 & 29 of NDPS Parao Ambala Act

3. Counsel for the petitioner submits that as per allegations, name of the petitioner has revealed out in the second disclosure statement of the co-

accused, i.e., Suraj @ Passi, from whom 260 grams of ‘Heroin’ was recovered. Counsel also submits that petitioner is a seriously ailing patient, as he is HIV positive since long and his immunity power is very low. It is also argued that another similarly situated co-accused, namely Sikander, has already been extended the concession of regular bail by this Court vide order dated 27.01.2025, passed in CRM-M-3379-2025, titled as “Sikander v. State of Haryana” (Annexure P-2), wherein while granting bail, the medical condition of the said co-accused was duly considered.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the prosecution is primarily relying upon the disclosure statement of the main accused – Suraj @ Passi, which, however, is not corroborated by any independent or substantive evidence. It is argued that such disclosure statements, standing alone, are inadmissible in the eyes of law unless duly supported by other cogent and impeachable material.

Counsel candidly submits that though the petitioner is involved in multiple other cases, in most of them he is already on bail. Thus, in view of the petitioner’s precarious medical condition, counsel prays for the grant of regular bail.

5. Per contra, learned State counsel, while vehemently opposing the submissions advanced by counsel for the petitioner, places reliance upon the medical status report dated 30.06.2025. It is further submitted that the factum of registration of several other criminal cases against the petitioner also finds mention in paragraph No.2 of the said affidavit. For ready reference, the relevant extract is reproduced here-under:-

“(a) FIR No.276/2017 U/s 120-B IPC P.S. Baldev Nagar That the case has been acquitted on 19.09.2024 by the orders of Dr. Sushma-1, JMIC, Ambala.

(b) FIR No.129/2019 U/S-148, 149, 302, 307, 323, 341, 324, 506 IPC & 25 of Arms Act, P.S. Parao (On bail).

(c) FIR No. 406/2021 U/S- 42 of Prisons Act, P.S. Baldev Nagar (On Bail).

(d) FIR No. 58/2024 U/s 380/457 IPC, P.S. Mahesh Nagar (On Bail). (e) FIR No. 203/2021 U/s 120-B IPC P.S. Baldev Nagar, Ambala ( On bail).

(f) FIR No.314/2022 U/s 21,29 of NDPS Act, P.S. Ambala City (On bail).

(g) FIR No. 192/2021 U/s 120-B IPC, P.S. Baldev Nagar (On bail).

(h) FIR No. 55/2024 U/s 21B,29,25 of NDPS Act, P.S. Madhuban, Karnal (On Bail).

(i) FIR No. 444/2021 U/s 42-A Prisons Act, P.S. Baldev Nagar On bail).

(j) FIR No. 322/2022 U/s 42-A Prisons Act, P.S. Baldev Nagar (On bail).

(k) FIR no. 10/2024 U/s 380/457/511 IPC, P.S. Panjokhara, Ambala.” It is noticed that except on case mentioned at Sr. No. (k), in all other cases, petitioner is shown to be on bail.

6. In response to the submissions