Bhagwati Lal v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH 101-1 Date of decision: 20.04.2026 Bhagwati Lal ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY Present :

Mr. Sauhard Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Gautam Kaile, DAG, Haryana.

**** AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (Oral) 1.

The present petition has been filed under Section 482 BNSS, 2023, for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.130, dated 07.06.2025, under Sections 15(c), 29 of NDPS Act, registered at Police Station Uklana, District Hisar.

2.

On 16.10.2025, the Co-ordinate Bench had passed the following order:- "xx 2. As per the case of the prosecution, a recovery of Doda post and Chura post weighing 189.930 kg was effected on the basis of secret information from a truck that was being driven by the main accused, namely Ranjeet Singh. Subsequently, during the course of investigation, Ranjeet Singh disclosed the names of other coaccused persons, including the present petitioner, Bhagwati Lal, and one Paramdev @ Rinku.

3. Mr. Rakesh Nehra, learned Senior Advocate, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits that although the recovery, according to the prosecution, was effected based on secret information, the name of the petitioner does not find mention in the FIR, nor is there any allegation therein that the contraband was transported from the State of Rajasthan at the instance of the petitioner.

4. In fact, the allegation now sought to be built up by the prosecution is that the petitioner allegedly instructed co-accused Ranjeet Singh to transport the recovered Doda post and Chura post weighing 189.930 kg to another co-accused, Paramdev @ Rinku.

5. Learned Senior Counsel further submits that apart from the disclosure statement of co-accused Ranjeet Singh, no other connecting evidence is available on record to implicate the petitioner. It is argued that the other alleged material comprises only a few WhatsApp calls, which cannot be treated as substantial evidence to conclude that the recovered contraband was being transported at the petitioner's instance.

-26. Inviting the attention to paragraph No. 10(a) of the status report filed by the respondent/State, learned Senior Counsel submits that while a money trail has been alleged between co-accused Paramdev @ Rinku (through his wife, Rani) and Ranjeet Singh, no such money trail has been attributed to the petitioner. No details or documents have been furnished in the status report to show any financial transaction involving the petitioner with any other coaccused said to be involved in the alleged narcotics trade.

7. Learned Senior Counsel also submits that co-accused Paramdev @ Rinku has already been granted the concession of interim bail by this Hon'ble Court vide order dated 14.10.2025 passed in CRM-M57420-2025.

8. Counsel submits that petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation, provided that he is granted protection from arrest.

9. Notice of motion.

On advance notice, Mr. Kanwar Sanjiv Kumar, AAG, Haryana, puts in appearance on behalf of the respondent - State. He seeks some time to file status report.

10. Adjourned to 15.11.2025

11. 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 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.).

12. Besides, it is directed that petitioner would hand over his passport to the Investigating Agency or to Court concerned, if he possesses. Otherwise, would submit an affidavit, disclosing the fact that he does not possess any passport. It is also directed that before leaving country any time during trial, petitioner would seek prior permission of the Court.

13. To be heard alongwith CRM-M-57420-2025."

3.

Learned counsel submits that in pursuance of the afore-mentioned order, the petitioner has not only joined investigation but also fully cooperated with the investigating agency. He further submits that in case the investigating agency requires the petitioner to appear, he shall make himself available without demur.

4.

Learned State counsel on instructions from the Investigating Officer affirms the factum of joining the investigation by the petitioner and cooperating with the investigating agency. He also submits that at this stage, the petitioner is not required for further custodial interrogation. 5.

In view of the above and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, anticipatory bail petition filed by the petitioner is allowed and the order dated 16.10.2025 granting interim bail to him, is hereby made absolute,

-3subject to compliance of conditions as specified under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023.

6.

However, it is made clear that if the petitioner fails to join and cooperate with the investigating agency as and when required, the State would be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of the present anticipatory bail granted to him.

(AMAN CHAUDHARY) 20.04.2026 JUDGE ashok Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No