← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/28300/2025allowed

Rahul Bansal v. State Of Punjab

2025-08-07Mr. Justice Sanjay Vashisth3 pages

- 1 -

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Decided on : 07.08.2025 Rahul Bansal . . . Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Punjab . . . Respondent(s)

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH PRESENT: Mr. Amit Rawat, Advocate for Mr. Satnam Singh Gill, Advocate for the petitioner(s).

Mr. Manjinder S. Bhullar, DAG, Punjab.

**** SANJAY VASHISTH , J. (Oral) 1.

Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438 Cr.P.C.), is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed here-under:- Name of Petitioner (s) FIR No.

Date Section(s) Police Station District Rahul Bansal 30.04.2025 22(c) of NDPS Act Sadar Rampura Bathinda (Section 29 NDPS Act, added later on) 2.

On 22.05.2025, following order was passed:- "1.

Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438 Cr.P.C.), is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder:- Name & age of Petitioner (s) FIR No.

Date Section(s) Police Station District Rahul Bansal, 44 years 30.04.2025 22(c) of NDPS Act (Section 29 NDPS Act, added later on) Sadar Rampura Bathinda 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, submits that in the instant case, recovery of 2500/- tablets of Clovidol-100 has been effected from

- 2 - the main accused, namely, Taranjot Singh @ Tarni, on 30.04.2025. Counsel further submits that petitioner is not named in the secret information, but his name has surfaced on the disclosure statement suffered by the already arrested accused on 01.05.2025 alleging that it is the petitioner, who supplied the contraband. However, the contraband in question has already been recovered from the possession of the said Taranjot Singh @ Tarni and no recovery has been made from the petitioner.

3.

Apart from the said disclosure statement, there is no other substantive or independent evidence available with the prosecution to connect the petitioner with the alleged offence.

4.

Thus, prays for grant of concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the present case, as he is ready to join the investigation as and when called by the investigating agency.

5.

Notice of motion.

6.

On advance notice, Mr. Neeraj Madaan, Sr. DAG, Punjab puts in appearance on behalf of the respondent - State, and seeks some time to respond to the submissions addressed by learned counsel opposite, after seeking instructions, and, in case of necessity, to file status report. 7.

Adjourned to 07.08.2025.

8.

In the meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to join the investigation as and when required to do so by the Investigating Agency. In the event of his arrest, the petitioner shall be released on ad-interim bail, subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. The petitioner shall also be abide by all the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.). 9.

Besides, the petitioner would submit/surrender his passport before the Arresting Officer and an undertaking on oath that in case of leaving the Country, he would seek prior permission from the Investigating Agency/concerned Court. If the petitioner has no passport, he shall submit an affidavit, disclosing the fact that he does not possess/own any passport. 10.

It is also directed that before leaving country any time during trial, petitioner would seek prior permission of the Court." 3.

Continuing his submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that in compliance of the order dated 22.05.2025, passed by this Court, petitioner has joined the investigation, and has fully co-operated. Therefore, he prays for confirmation of the said interim anticipatory bail order.

- 3 - 4.

Learned State counsel on instructions, confirms the said averment made by learned counsel for the petitioner of joining the investigation on 08.07.2025, by the petitioner, and submits that as of now, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required for the purpose of investigation.

5.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

6.

Since, petitioner has already joined the investigation and custodial interrogation is no more required; ad-interim bail order dated 22.05.2025, passed by this Court is hereby made absolute. Accordingly, present petition is allowed.

However, petitioner shall continue to join the investigation as and when required to do so and abide by all the terms and conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023.

7.

Accordingly, petition stands disposed of.

(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE August 07, 2025 J.Ram Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No