##PAGE1##

CRM-M-12273-2026 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

224

CRM-M-12273-2026 Date of decision: 06.04.2026

MANDEEP KUMAR ALIAS MANI ….Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB ....Respondent

CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL

Present:- Mr. G.S. Hundal, Advocate for Mr. Vikramjeet Singh, Advocate

for the petitioner.

Mr. Amit Shukla, DAG, Punjab.

*****

RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL, J. (ORAL)

1. Through the instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNSS”), the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No.164 dated 18.09.2025 registered under Sections 21(C), 27, 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances

Act, 1985, at Police Station City Malout, District Sri Muktsar Sahib.

2. On 24.03.2026, the following order was passed by this Court: -

“Prayer in the present petition filed under Section

482 of the BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.164 dated 18.09.2025 registered under Sections 21(C), 27, 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, at Police Station City Malout, District Sri

Muktsar Sahib.

GURPREET

2026.04.07 12:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document.

CRM-M-12273-2026 2

Brief facts as per the prosecution case are that on

18.09.2025, S.I. Kulbir Chand along with other police officials, apprehended Sukhvir Singh and Manpreet Sharma alias Preet while they were travelling in a car. Upon checking 4 kgs 4 mg of Heroin was recovered from the car. Initially, the FIR in question

was registered against the said co-accused persons.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further contends that the petitioner was neither present at the spot, nor was named in the FIR and he has no concern with the said incident. He further contends that the petitioner has been nominated as an accused only on the basis of the disclosure statement made by co-accused. Apart from the disclosure statement, there is no other evidence to connect the petitioner with the offence in question and it is a trite law that disclosure statement of the co-accused during his custodial interrogation is not admissible in evidence. No recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. Petitioner has clean antecedents as he is not involved in any other case. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation as and

when called upon to do so by the investigating agency.

On the other hand, learned State counsel has filed the status report in the matter and while referring to the status report, has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail, by submitting that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature. However, he has not controverted the fact that the petitioner is a first time offender and is not involved in any

other case.

Adjourned to 06.04.2026.

In the meantime, the petitioner is directed to join investigation within a week from today and would appear as and when required by the Investigating Officer and cooperate with the Investigating Agency. In the event of arrest, he shall be admitted to interim bail on furnishing of bail/surety bonds to the

GURPREET

2026.04.07 12:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document.

CRM-M-12273-2026 3

satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section

482(2) of BNSS, 2023.”

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance with the order dated 24.03.2026 passed by this Court, the petitioner has joined the investigation. He has further argued that there is no connection between the petitioner and the co-accused and that the petitioner is sought to be

implicated only on the basis of the disclosure statement of the co-accused.

4. Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Balwinder Singh, has submitted that the petitioner