RESHMA @ KANDARI v. PUNJAB STATE OF PUNJAB

Mr. Amit Shukla, DAG, Punjab. Mr. Amit Shukla, DAG, Punjab. ***** RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL, J. (ORAL) RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL, J. (ORAL)

1. Through the instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Through the instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Through the instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Through the instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNSS”), the petitioner Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNSS”), the petitioner Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNSS”), the petitioner Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNSS”), the petitioner FIR No.264 dated 23.11.2025 registered under seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No.264 dated 23.11.2025 registered under FIR No.264 dated 23.11.2025 registered under seeks anticipatory bail in case Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Sections 21 and 25-61-85 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Sections 21 and 25 Act, 1985 (Section 29 of the NDPS Act added later on), at Police Station City Act, 1985 (Section 29 of the NDPS Act added later on), at Police Station City Act, 1985 (Section 29 of the NDPS Act added later on), at Police Station City Act, 1985 (Section 29 of the NDPS Act added later on), at Police Station City Jagraon, District Ludhiana (Rural). Jagraon, District Ludhiana (Rural)

2. On 23.12.2025, the following order On following order was passed: - “Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 482 “ of the Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.264 dated 23.11.2025 registered under Sections 21 case FIR No.264 dated 23.11.2025 registered under Sections 21 case FIR No.264 dated 23.11.2025 registered under Sections 21 case FIR No.264 dated 23.11.2025 registered under Sections 21 85 of and 25-61-85 of 85 of and 25 the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (Section 29 of the NDPS Act added later Substances Act, 1985 (Section 29 of the NDPS Act added later Substances Act, 1985 (Section 29 of the NDPS Act added later Substances Act, 1985 (Section 29 of the NDPS Act added later Police Station City Jagraon, District Ludhiana (Rural). on), at Police Station City Jagraon, District Ludhiana (Rural). on), at Brief facts as per the prosecution case are that on Brief facts as per the prosecution case are that on Brief facts as per the prosecution case are that on

23.11.2025, HC Baljinder Kaur along with other police officials 23.11.2025, HC Baljinder Kaur along with other police officials 23.11.2025, HC Baljinder Kaur along with other police officials GURPREET 2026.01.15 17:30 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-73036 73036-2025 - -2- was on patrolling duty and on the basis of secret information, was on patrolling duty and on the basis of secret information, was on patrolling duty and on the basis of secret information, was on patrolling duty and on the basis of secret information, three persons, namely, Gurvinder Singh, Lovepreet apprehended three persons, namely, Gurvinder Singh, Lovepreet three persons, namely, Gurvinder Singh, Lovepreet apprehended Singh and Brij Lal, who were found in conscious possession of Singh and Brij Lal, who were found in conscious possession of Singh and Brij Lal, who were found in conscious possession of Singh and Brij Lal, who were found in conscious possession of 40 grams of heroin. Initially, the FIR in question was registered 40 grams of heroin. Initially, the FIR in question was registered 40 grams of heroin. Initially, the FIR in question was registered 40 grams of heroin. Initially, the FIR in question was registered accused persons. against the said co-accused persons. against the said co ds that the Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the Learned counsel for the petitioner conten petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further contends that the petitioner was neither present at the further contends that the petitioner was neither present at the further contends that the petitioner was neither present at the further contends that the petitioner was neither present at the spot, nor was named in the FIR and she has no concern with the spot, nor was named in the FIR and she has no concern with the spot, nor was named in the FIR and she has no concern with the spot, nor was named in the FIR and she has no concern with the itioner has said incident. It has also been contended that the petitioner has said incident. It has also been contended that the pet said incident. It has also been contended that the pet been nominated as an accused only on the basis of the disclosure been nominated as an accused only on the basis of the disclosure been nominated as an accused only on the basis of the disclosure been nominated as an accused only on the basis of the disclosure accused Brij Lal. Apart from the statement made by co-accused Brij Lal. Apart from the accused Brij Lal. Apart from the statement made by co disclosure statement, there is no other evidence to connect the disclosure statement, there is no other evidence to connect the disclosure statement, there is no other evidence to connect the disclosure statement, there is no other evidence to connect the petitioner with the offence in question and it is a trite law that petitioner with the offence in question and it is a trite law petitioner with the offence in question and it is a trite law accused during his custodial disclosure statement of the co-accused during his custodial disclosure statement of the co disclosure statement of the co recovery is to be effected interrogation is not admissible. No recovery is to be effected interrogation is not admissible. No interrogation is not admissible. No from the petitioner. Learned counsel further submits that the from the petitioner. Learned counsel further submits that the from the petitioner. Learned counsel further submits that the from the petitioner. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation as and petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation as and petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation as and petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation as and when called upon to do so by the investigating agency. when called upon to do so by the investigating agency. when called upon to do so by the investigating agency. Notice of motion. On asking of the Court, Mr. Ravinder Singh, DAG, On asking of the Court, Mr. Ravinder Singh, DAG, On asking of the Court, Mr. Ravinder Singh, DAG, State and seeks Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State and seeks Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondent Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondent time to file status report in the matter. time to file status report in the matter. time to file status report in the matter. Adjourned to 13.01.2026. n the meantime, the petitioner is directed to join In the meantime, the petitioner is directed to join n the meantime, the petitioner is directed to join investigation within a week from today and would appear as and investigation within a week from today and would appear as and investigation within a week from today and would appear as and investigation within a week from today and would appear as and when required by the Investigating Officer and cooperate with when required by the Investigating Officer and cooperate with when required by the Investigating Officer and cooperate with when required by the Investigating Officer and cooperate with the Investigating Agency. In the event of arrest, she shall be the Investigating Agency. In the event of arrest, she shall be the Investigating Agency. In the event of arrest, she shall be the Investigating Agency. In the event of arrest, she shall be im bail on furnishing of bail/surety bonds to the admitted to interim bail on furnishing of bail/surety bonds to the im bail on furnishing of bail/surety bonds to the admitted to inter satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023.” 482(2) of BNSS, 2023. GURPREET 2026.01.15 17:30 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-73036 73036-2025 - -3-

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance with the order dated .2025 passed by this Court, the petitioner has joined the order dated 23.12.2025 passed by this Court, the petitioner has joined .2025 passed by this Court, the petitioner has joined e has further argued that there is no connection between the investigation. He has further argued that there is no connection between e has further argued that there is no connection between the investigation. the petitioner and the co-accused and that the petitioner and the petitioner is sought to be that the petitioner is sought to be implicated only on the basis of the disclosure statement implicated only on the basis of disclosure statement of the co-accused.

4. HC Learned counsel for the State, (on instructions from HC Learned counsel for the State, Learned counsel for the State, , has submitted that the petitioner has joined the investigation Baljinder Kaur), has submitted that the petitioner has joined the investigation , has submitted that the petitioner has joined the investigation Baljinder Kaur and is no terms of interim order/protection earlier afforded to the petitioner and is no terms of interim order/protection earlier afforded to the petitioner in terms of interim order/protection earlier afforded to the petitioner longer required for further custodial interrogation longer required for further submitted custodial interrogation. He has however submitted that since the FIR in question is under the NDPS Act of 1985, the petitioner that since the FIR in question is under the NDPS Act of 1985, the petitioner that since the FIR in question is under the NDPS Act of 1985, the petitioner that since the FIR in question is under the NDPS Act of 1985, the petitioner ded the concession of anticipatory bail. ought not to be extended the concession of anticipatory bail. ought not to be exten

5. On a specific query put by this Court to the learned State counsel On a specific query put by this Court to the learned State counsel On a specific query put by this Court to the learned State counsel On a specific query put by this Court to the learned State counsel as to whether, apart from the disclosure statement, any material has been as to whether, apart from the disclosure statement, any material has been as to whether, apart from the disclosure statement, any material has been as to whether, apart from the disclosure statement, any material has been d found during investigation to connect the petitioner with the recovered found during investigation to connect the petitioner with the recovere found during investigation to connect the petitioner with the recovere contraband, to which learned State counsel submitted that no material other contraband, to which learned State counsel submitted that no material other contraband, to which learned State counsel submitted that no material other contraband, to which learned State counsel submitted that no material other than disclosure statement has been found to connect the petitioner with either than disclosure statement has been found to connect the petitioner with either than disclosure statement has been found to connect the petitioner with either than disclosure statement has been found to connect the petitioner with either the offence or the recovered contraband. the offence or the recovered contraband.

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

7. At this juncture, it would be apposite to refer herein to a At this juncture, it would be apposite to refer herein to a At this juncture, it would be apposite to refer herein to a At this juncture, it would be apposite to refer herein to a ‘Tofan Singh vs. judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court titled as ‘Tofan Singh vs. judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court titled as judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court titled as , relevant whereof State of Tamil Nadu, AIR 2020 Supreme Court 5592’, relevant whereof State of Tamil Nadu, AIR 2020 Supreme Court 5592’ State of Tamil Nadu, AIR 2020 Supreme Court 5592’ reads as under: reads as under: "155. We answer the reference by stating: (i) That the officers who are "155. We answer the reference by stating: (i) That the officers who are "155. We answer the reference by stating: (i) That the officers who are "155. We answer the reference by stating: (i) That the officers who are invested with powers under section 53 of the NDPS Act are "police invested with powers under section 53 of the NDPS Act are "police invested with powers under section 53 of the NDPS Act are "police invested with powers under section 53 of the NDPS Act are "police officers within the meaning of section 25 of the Evidence Act, as a officers within the meaning of section 25 of the Evidence Act, as a officers within the meaning of section 25 of the Evidence Act, as a officers within the meaning of section 25 of the Evidence Act, as a them would be result of which any confessional statement made to them would be result of which any confessional statement made to result of which any confessional statement made to barred under the provisions of section 25 of the Evidence Act, and barred under the provisions of section 25 of the Evidence Act, and barred under the provisions of section 25 of the Evidence Act, and barred under the provisions of section 25 of the Evidence Act, and cannot be taken into account in order to convict an accused under the cannot be taken into account in order to convict an accused under the cannot be taken into account in order to convict an accused under the cannot be taken into account in order to convict an accused under the NDPS Act (ii) That a statement recorded under section 67 of the NDPS NDPS Act (ii) That a statement recorded under section 67 of the NDPS NDPS Act (ii) That a statement recorded under section 67 of the NDPS NDPS Act (ii) That a statement recorded under section 67 of the NDPS GURPREET 2026.01.15 17:30 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-73036 73036-2025 - -4- Act cannot be used as a confessional statement in the trial of an offence Act cannot be used as a confessional statement in the trial of an offence Act cannot be used as a confessional statement in the trial of an offence Act cannot be used as a confessional statement in the trial of an offence under the NDPS ACT". under the NDPS ACT".

8. More recently, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a judgment titled as More recently, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a judgment titled as More recently, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a judgment titled as More recently, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a judgment titled as ‘Smt. Najmunisha, Abdul Hamid Chandmiya @ Ladoo Bapu Vs. State of ‘Smt. Najmunisha, Abdul Hamid Chandmiya @ Ladoo Bapu Vs. State of ‘Smt. Najmunisha, Abdul Hamid Chandmiya @ Ladoo Bapu Vs. State of ‘Smt. Najmunisha, Abdul Hamid Chandmiya @ Ladoo Bapu Vs. State of Gujrat, Narcotics Control Bureau’ 2024 INSC 290’, Gujrat, Narcotics has reiterated the ratio Control Bureau’ 2024 INSC 290’, has reiterated the ratio decidendi of the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Tofan decidendi of the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Tofan decidendi of the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Tofan decidendi of the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Tofan Singh (supra). Singh (supra).

9. he Hon'ble Supreme Court while dealing with a plea for Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court while dealing with a plea for he Hon'ble Supreme Court while dealing with a plea for Further, r NDPS Act, 1985; in a judgment grant of anticipatory bail in a case under NDPS Act, 1985; in a judgment r NDPS Act, 1985; in a judgment grant of anticipatory bail in a case unde ‘Vijay Singh vs. The State of Haryana, bearing Special Leave to titled as ‘Vijay Singh vs. The State of Haryana, bearing Special Leave to ‘Vijay Singh vs. The State of Haryana, bearing Special Leave to ‘Vijay Singh vs. The State of Haryana, bearing Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.(s)1266/2023 decided on 17.05.2023’ has held as under: Appeal (Crl.) No.(s)1266/2023 decided on 17.05.2023’ Appeal (Crl.) No.(s)1266/2023 decided on 17.05.2023’ "The petitioner is alleged to have committed offences under Sections 15 "The petitioner is alleged to have committed offences under Sections 15 "The petitioner is alleged to have committed offences under Sections 15 "The petitioner is alleged to have committed offences under Sections 15 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter called the NDPS Act". His application for anticipatory bail (hereinafter called the NDPS Act". His application for anticipatory bail (hereinafter called the NDPS Act". His application for anticipatory bail (hereinafter called the NDPS Act". His application for anticipatory bail was rejected by the High Court. The allegations in the FIR are that 1.7 was rejected by the High Court. The allegations in the FIR are that 1.7 was rejected by the High Court. The allegations in the FIR are that 1.7 was rejected by the High Court. The allegations in the FIR are that 1.7 accused. Kg of Poppy Straw (Doda Post) was recovered from the co-accused. Kg of Poppy Straw (Doda Post) was recovered from t Kg of Poppy Straw (Doda Post) was recovered from t The petitioner concededly was not present at the spot but was named by The petitioner concededly was not present at the spot but was named by The petitioner concededly was not present at the spot but was named by The petitioner concededly was not present at the spot but was named by accused. That apart there is no other material to implicate the the co-accused. That apart there is no other material to implicate the accused. That apart there is no other material to implicate the accused. That apart there is no other material to implicate the petitioner. The prosecution urges that another case with allegations of petitioner. The prosecution urges that another case with allegations of petitioner. The prosecution urges that another case with allegations of petitioner. The prosecution urges that another case with allegations of the NDPS Act are pending against the commission of offence under the NDPS Act are pending against the the NDPS Act are pending against the commission of offence under petitioner. It is not denied that in those proceedings he was granted petitioner. It is not denied that in those proceedings he was granted petitioner. It is not denied that in those proceedings he was granted petitioner. It is not denied that in those proceedings he was granted bail. Having regard to these circumstances, the petitioner is directed to bail. Having regard to these circumstances, the petitioner is directed to bail. Having regard to these circumstances, the petitioner is directed to bail. Having regard to these circumstances, the petitioner is directed to the enlarged on anticipatory bail, subject to such terms and conditions the enlarged on anticipatory bail, subject to such terms and conditions the enlarged on anticipatory bail, subject to such terms and conditions the enlarged on anticipatory bail, subject to such terms and conditions the trial Court may impose. The petition is allowed. All pending as the trial Court may impose. The petition is allowed. All pending the trial Court may impose. The petition is allowed. All pending the trial Court may impose. The petition is allowed. All pending applications are disposed of." applications are disposed of."

10. he petitioner is sought to be arrayed In the present case also, the petitioner is sought to be arrayed he petitioner is sought to be arrayed In the present case also, t solely on the basis of the disclosure statement of the co solely on the basis of accused. Suffice to disclosure statement of the co-accused. Suffice to say there is no other material available to connect the petitioner with the say there is no other material available to connect the petitioner with the say there is no other material available to connect the petitioner with the say there is no other material available to connect the petitioner with the recovered contraband. The veracity of the disclosure statement made by the recovered contraband. The veracity of the disclosure statement made by the recovered contraband. The veracity of the disclosure statement made by the recovered contraband. The veracity of the disclosure statement made by the uring the course of the accused will be subject to comprehensive scrutiny during the course of the accused will be subject to comprehensive scrutiny d co-accused will be subject to comprehensive scrutiny d GURPREET 2026.01.15 17:30 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-73036 73036-2025 - -5- trial and the same cannot be a ground to decline the concession of same cannot by itself be a ground to decline the concession of be a ground to decline the concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, especially when anticipatory bail to the petitioner he has joined the especially when she has joined the protection granted by this Court. investigation in terms of interim order/protection granted by this Court. protection granted by this Court. investigation in terms of interim

11. In view of the above, the petition is allowed and In view of the above, the interim the petition is allowed and the interim order dated 23 is made absolute. The petitioner 23.12.2025 passed by this Court is made absolute. The petitioner is made absolute. The petitioner by the Investigating shall continue to join investigation as and when required by the Investigating shall continue to join investigation as and when shall continue to join investigation as and when conditions as provided under Section Officer and shall also abide by the conditions as provided under Section conditions as provided under Section Officer and shall also abide by the 482(2) of the BNSS. 482(2) of the BNSS.

12. Needless to say anything observed herein above shall not be Needless to say anything observed herein above shall not be Needless to say anything observed herein above shall not be Needless to say anything observed herein above shall not be construed to be an opinion on the merits of the case. construed to be an opinion on the merits of the case. construed to be an opinion on the merits of the case.

13.01.2026 Gurpreet speaking/reasoned? Yes/No i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No ii) Whether reportable? Yes/No (RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL) (RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL) JUDGE GURPREET 2026.01.15 17:30 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document.