04.2026 Da MANDEEP KU EP KUMAR ALIAS MANI v. STATE OF PU PUNJAB oner

Judgment

1. Through the instant petition file Th f the n filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Naga Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For 3 (For short “BNSS”), the petitioner seeks anticipato

icipatory bail in case FIR No.164 date 4 dated 18.09.2025 registered under Sections 21(C), 21(C), 27, 29 of the Narcotic Drug Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, at Po , at Police Station City Malout, Distric District Sri Muktsar Sahib.

2. On 24.03.2026, the following order On g order was passed by this Court: - “Prayer in the presen resent petition filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 is for gra 48 r grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.164 date dated 18.09.2025 registered under Sections 21(C), 27, 29 of the Nar Sec Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, at Police St Su Sri ce Station City Malout, District Sri Muktsar Sahib. Mu GURPREET 2026.04.07 12:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-12273 12273-2026 2 Brief facts as per the pr e prosecution case are that on

18.09.2025, S.I. Kulbir Chand alo 18 als, along with other police officials, apprehended Sukhvir Singh and nd Manpreet Sharma alias Preet while they were travelling in a car car. Upon checking 4 kgs 4 mg of Heroin was recovered from the ca He e car. Initially, the FIR in question was registered against the said co co-accused persons. Learned counsel for the the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implic He plicated in the present case. He further contends that the petition itioner was neither present at the spot, nor was named in the FIR a IR and he has no concern with the said incident. He further contend tends that the petitioner has been nominated as an accused only o ly on the basis of the disclosure statement made by co-accused. sed. Apart from the disclosure statement, there is no other evide evidence to connect the petitioner with the offence in question and i nd it is a trite law that disclosure statement of the co-accused during uring his custodial interrogation is not admissible in evidence. No rec recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. Petitioner has clean an p n antecedents as he is not involved in any other case. Learned cou counsel further submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to g to join the investigation as and when called upon to do so by the in he investigating agency. On the other hand, learne arned State counsel has filed the status report in the matter and and while referring to the status report, has opposed the prayer for r for grant of anticipatory bail, by submitting that the allegations leve levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature. However, he has e has not controverted the fact that the petitioner is a first time offend ffender and is not involved in any other case. Adjourned to 06.04.2026. In the meantime, the pe petitioner is directed to join investigation within a week from to m today and would appear as and when required by the Investigatin gating Officer and cooperate with the Investigating Agency. In the the event of arrest, he shall be admitted to interim bail on furnish rnishing 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 12273-2026 3 satisfaction of Arresting/Investig estigating Officer. The petitioner shall also abide by the condition itions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023.” 48

3. Learned counsel for the petitione Lea titioner submits that in compliance with the order d rder dated 24.03.2026 passed by this C y this Court, the petitioner has joined the investigatio tigation. He has further argued that th that there is no connection between the petitioner a oner and the co-accused and that o be that the petitioner is sought to be implicated only d only on the basis of the disclosure sta sure statement of the co-accused.

4. Learned counsel for the State, Lea ASI State, on instructions from ASI Balwinder Sing r Singh, has submitted that the petition etitioner has joined the investigation in terms of inter f interim order/protection earlier affor is no r afforded to the petitioner and is no longer required quired for further custodial interrogati rogation. He has however submitted that since the F the FIR in question is under the ND e NDPS Act of 1985, the petitioner ought not to be to be extended the concession of antic f anticipatory bail.

5. On a specific query put by this Cou On is Court to the learned State counsel as to whether, ether, apart from the disclosure state e statement, any material has been found during i ring investigation to connect the p the petitioner with the recovered contraband, to d, to which learned State counsel sub sel submitted that no material other than disclosure losure statement has been found to con to connect the petitioner with either the offence or th ce or the recovered contraband.

6. I have heard learned counsel for th I h d the l for the rival parties and perused the record. available record

7. Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Cour Fur a for e Court while dealing with a plea for grant of anticip anticipatory bail in a case under ND er NDPS Act, 1985; in a judgment GURPREET 2026.04.07 12:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-12273 12273-2026 4 titled as ‘Vijay ijay Singh vs. The State of Harya aryana, bearing Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) N l.) No.(s)1266/2023 decided on 17.0

17.05.2023’ has held as under: "The petitioner is alleged to ha "Th have committed offences under Sections 15 and 29 of the Narc Sec arcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafte Su His after called the NDPS Act". His application for anticipatory bail w urt. il was rejected by the High Court. The allegations in the FIR are that Th that 1.7 Kg of Poppy Straw (Doda Post) was recovered from the Po the co-accused. The petitioner concededly was not present at the - the spot but was named by the co- accused. That apart there is no o no other material to implicate the petitioner. The prosecution urg urges that another case with allegations of commission of offe offence under the NDPS Act are pending against the petitioner. I r. It is not denied that in those proceedings he was granted ba d bail. Having regard to these circumstances, the petitioner is is directed to the enlarged on anticipatory bail, subject to such such terms and conditions as the trial Court may impose. The pet petition is allowed. All pending applications are disposed of."

8. In the present case also, the petit In e petitioner is sought to be arrayed solely on the b the basis of the disclosure statement ce to tement of the co-accused. Suffice to say there is no is no other material available to co to connect the petitioner with the recovered contr contraband. The veracity of the disc y the e disclosure statement made by the co-accused will d will be subject to comprehensive sc f the ive scrutiny during the course of the trial and the sam same cannot by itself be a ground n of ground to decline the concession of anticipatory ba ry bail to the petitioner, especiall pecially when he has joined the investigation in tion in terms of interim order/protectio tection granted by this Court.

9. In view of the above, the petitio In petition is allowed and the interim order dated 24.0

24.03.2026 passed by this Court is is made absolute. The petitioner GURPREET 2026.04.07 12:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-12273 12273-2026 5 shall continue t tinue to join investigation as and when d when required by the Investigating Officer and sha nd shall also abide by the condition nditions as provided under Section 482(2) of the BN the BNSS.

10. Needless to say anything observe Ne t be bserved herein above shall not be construed to be to be an opinion on the merits of the c f the case.

06.04.2026 Gurpreet es/No i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No ii) Whether reportable? Yes/No AL) (RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL) JUDGE GURPREET 2026.04.07 12:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document.