Partap v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Date of decision : 19.03.2026 Partap ..... Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Haryana ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA PARTAP SINGH Present :

Mr. Sameydeen, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Sunny Namdev, AAG, Haryana.

***** SURYA PARTAP SINGH, J.

This petition for bail filed by the petitioner under Section 483 of 'the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023'. It has been filed with regard to a case arising out of FIR No.328 dated 20.09.2018, for the commission of offence punishable under Sections 420 and 201 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 20, 27-A and 29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, Police Station Sadar Jind, District Jind. 2.

Notice of motion.

3.

Mr. Sunny Namdev, AAG, Haryana appears on behalf of respondent-State. Hence service of notice upon the State is hereby dispensed with. The learned State Counsel has filed custody certificate of the petitioner. The same be taken on record. No formal reply has been filed by

the State. However, the learned State Counsel has orally opposed the present petition.

4.

Inter alia, it has been contended that on the basis of secret information, from the possession of co-accused, namely Rajesh and Kapil, the recovery of Ganja had taken place. On measurement, the weight of the abovementioned contraband came out to be 456.870 kg. The learned counsel for the petitioner has further contended that when the investigation with regard to recovery of abovementioned contraband was in progress, the coaccused, namely Rajesh and Kapil, suffered disclosure statement, wherein they nominated the present petitioner.

5.

According to learned counsel for the petitioner, earlier the benefit of bail was accorded to the petitioner vide order dated 09.01.2023, but later on, due to miscommunication the petitioner could not appear before the Court and therefore, his bail was cancelled and bail bonds were forfeited to the State. As per learned counsel for the petitioner, subsequently, i.e. on 16.09.2025, the petitioner had been arrested and since then, i.e. for a period of more than six months, he is in custody.

6.

In view of the fact that the petitioner has already suffered a long incarceration, and that the benefit of bail was accorded to the petitioner earlier also, and that nothing has been left to be recovered from the possession of petitioner, and the trial is not likely to be concluded in near future, the present petition is hereby allowed. The petitioner is hereby ordered to be released on fresh bail on furnishing personal bond and surety

bond(s) to the satisfaction of learned trial Court. However the abovementioned concession shall be subject to following conditions:- (i) that the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case, so as to dissuade him to disclose such facts to the Court or to any other authority;

(ii) that the petitioner shall at the time of execution of bond, furnish the address to the Court concerned and shall notify the change in address to the trial Court, till the final decision of the trial; and (iii) that the petitioner shall not leave India without prior permission of the trial Court.

(SURYA PARTAP SINGH) JUDGE 19.03.2026 Gaurav Thakur Whether speaking / reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No