Jasmer Singh v. State Of Haryana

CRM-M No.10799 of 2026 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** CRM-M No.10799 of 2026 Date of decision : 12.3.2026 Date of uploading : 12.3.2026 Jasmer Singh .............Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. Chander Pal Tiwana, Advocate and Mr. Sumit Tiwana, Advocate, for the petitioner Ms. Mahima Yashpal, Senior DAG, Haryana --- SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL) 1.

Present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.252 dated 21.8.2025 under Sections 22-C and 29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (Section 29 of NDPS Act added later on), registered at Police Station City Kaithal, District Kaithal.

2.

The gravamen of the FIR in question is that the petitioner is an accused of being involved in FIR pertaining to NDPS Act involving 18600 alprazolam tablets and 5000 tramadol capsules and ₹14,000/- as drug money allegedly recovered from the co-accused on secret information.

CRM-M No.10799 of 2026 -23. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is in custody since 22.8.2025. Learned counsel has further argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question. Learned counsel has further submitted that nothing has been recovered from the petitioner. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner was not named in the FIR and he was apprehended on the disclosure statement of co-accused Vikram. Learned counsel has further submitted that a similarly situated co-accused Pargat Singh has already been granted the concession of regular bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 4.2.2026 passed in CRM-M No.62476 of 2025. Learned counsel has further iterated that the petitioner is a young man aged about 28 years with no criminal antecedents. Thus, regular bail is prayed for. 4.

Learned State counsel has opposed the present petition by arguing that the allegations raised are serious in nature and thus the petitioner does not deserve the concession of the regular bail. Learned State counsel seeks to place on record custody certificate dated 11.3.2026 in Court, which is taken on record.

5.

I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the available records of the case.

6.

The petitioner was arrested on 22.8.2025. Investigation in the present FIR is complete and challan already stands presented. The culmination of trial will take its own time. It is not in dispute that nothing has been recovered from the petitioner and that the petitioner was not named in the FIR and he was apprehended on the disclosure statement of

CRM-M No.10799 of 2026 -3Vikram. It is also not in dispute that a similarly situated co-accused Pargat Singh has already been granted the concession of regular bail this Court. The rival contentions raised at Bar give rise to debatable issues which shall be ratiocinated upon during the course of trial. This Court does not deem it appropriate to delve deep into these rival contentions, at this stage, lest it may prejudice the trial. Nothing tangible has been brought forward to indicate the likelihood of the petitioner absconding from the process of justice or interfering with the prosecution evidence. 6.1 As per custody certificate dated 11.3.2026 filed by learned State counsel, the petitioner has already suffered incarceration for a period of 6 months and 19 days & is not shown to be involved in any other case. Suffice to say, further detention of the petitioner as an undertrial is not warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case. 7.

In view of above, the present petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Ld. concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate. However, in addition to conditions that may be imposed by the concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate, the petitioner shall remain bound by the following conditions:- (i) The petitioner shall not mis-use the liberty granted. (ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with any evidence, oral or documentary, during the trial.

(iii) The petitioner shall not absent himself on any date before the trial.

(iv) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail. (v) The petitioner shall deposit his passport, if any, with the trial Court.

(vi) The petitioner shall give his cell-phone number to the Investigating Officer/SHO of concerned Police Station and shall

CRM-M No.10799 of 2026 -4not change his cell-phone number without prior permission of the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate.

(vii) The petitioner shall not in any manner try to delay the trial. (viii) The petitioner shall submit, on the first working day of every month, an affidavit, before the concerned trial Court, to the effect that he has not been involved in commission of any offence after being released on bail. In case the petitioner is found to be involved in any offence after his being enlarged on bail in the present FIR, on the basis of his affidavit or otherwise, the State is mandated to move, forthwith, for cancellation of his bail which plea, but of course, shall be ratiocinated upon merits thereof.

8.

In case of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions and those which may be imposed by concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate as directed hereinabove or upon showing any other sufficient cause, the State/complainant shall be at liberty to move cancellation of bail of the petitioner.

9.

Ordered accordingly.

10.

Nothing said hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

(SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE 12.3.2026 Ashwanii Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No