Pritpal Singh v. State Of Haryana

CRM-M No.25572 of 2025 -1THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.25572 of 2025 Date of Decision: 12.05.2025 Pritpal Singh ..... Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ..... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ ***

Present:

Mr. Vikramjeet Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

*** RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J.

1.

Present second petition has been filed praying for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.90, dated 18.04.2025, under Sections 21-B, 61/85 of NDPS Act, 1985, registered at Police Station Kalanwali, District Dabwali.

2.

From the perusal of the record, it is evident that the petitioner had earlier approached this Court praying for the grant of anticipatory bail by way of filing CRM-M No.22044 of 2025. As this Court does not agree with the same, hence the petitioner was allowed to withdraw the petition and thus the same was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 28.04.2025 with liberty to the petitioner to surrender before the learned trial Court within a period of seven days to enable him to file the bail. However the petitioner did not surrender before the learned trial RITTU 2025.05.13 17:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M No.25572 of 2025 -2Court and again approached this Court by way of filing the present second petition praying for the grant of bail. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the contraband weighing 13.46 grams of heroin was recovered from the coaccused and not from the petitioner. 4.

However this Court does not find any change in the circumstances as the merits of the case were already taken into consideration during the first hearing but once the Court was not inclined to grant the anticipatory bail, then the petitioner was allowed to withdraw the petition with liberty as afore-mentioned. 5.

It is evident from the record of the case and as submitted by learned State counsel, the petitioner is facing prosecution in 03 more cases under the NDPS Act itself.

6.

Thus this Court neither find any change in the circumstances nor find any merit to entertain the present second petition filed by the petitioner praying for the grant of bail. Resultantly, the present second petition being devoid of any merit is hereby dismissed. Nothing said herein shall be treated as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

(RAJESH BHARDWAJ) 12.05.2025 JUDGE rittu Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No RITTU 2025.05.13 17:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document