Please Log in / Register to access the full text of this judgment and the entire database
(2026) Law Today Live Doc. Id. 21200 = 2026:PHHC:087268
Decided on: 11.06.2026
Present:
Mr. Vipin Mahajan, Senior Advocate (Through V.C.) with Mr. Randeep Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Ravneet Singh, DAG, Punjab.
***
NDPS -- Anticipatory bail -- Commercial quantity of opium recovered from co-accused – Implicated on the basis of supplementary disclosure statement of co-accused -- No previous involvement in NDPS cases -- Anticipatory bail granted.
***
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023), Section 482 -- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Sections 18(c), 25, 29 and 37 -- Anticipatory bail -- Recovery of 5 kilograms of opium from co-accused travelling in truck owned by petitioner -- Petitioner not named in initial disclosure statements of co-accused and implicated only in supplementary disclosure statement -- State conceding absence of any evidence against petitioner apart from said supplementary disclosure statement -- No previous involvement in any NDPS case -- Petitioner entitled to anticipatory bail subject to statutory conditions.
(Paras 3, 6-8)
***
DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (ORAL) –
1. That the present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, "BNSS") seeking the grant of anticipatory bail in case arising out of FIR No. 217 dated 30.10.2025, registered under Sections 18(c), 25 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, "NDPS Act"), at Police Station Chheharta, District Amritsar, Punjab.
2. As per the prosecution case, 5 kilograms of opium, falling within the commercial quantity category, was recovered from the possession of co-accused Parlhad Kumar and Naresh Devgan. The contraband was allegedly being transported in Truck No. BR-02GA-6903, which is owned by the petitioner.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the initial disclosure statements dated 01.11.2025 (Annexures R-1 and R-2), both co-accused, namely Parlhad Kumar and Naresh Devgan, did not name the petitioner. As per the said disclosure statements, the contraband in question had been procured and transported by the said co-accused themselves for the purpose of sale in the market. However, in the supplementary disclosure statement recorded on 03.11.2025 (Annexure R-3), the petitioner was nominated as the supplier and financier of the contraband.
4. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has clean antecedents and he is not involved in any other case. It is contended that the driver employed by the petitioner may have been dealing with the contraband and that the petitioner had no knowledge whatsoever regarding the transportation or possession of the opium.
5. Vide order dated 19.03.2026, this Court directed the State to file a status report specifying the role attributed to the petitioner, the evidence collected during investigation regarding his complicity and his criminal antecedents, if any.
6. Today, learned State counsel concedes that apart from the supplementary disclosure statement dated 03.11.2025 (Annexure R-3) made by the co-accused, there is no other evidence against the petitioner. It is further conceded that no other case under the NDPS Act has been registered against the petitioner. However, one criminal case pertaining to offences of cheating and forgery is stated to be registered against him in State of Bihar.
7. Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the fact that petitioner has no criminal antecedent with respect to NDPS cases; the fact that no case was ever registered by the complainant against the petitioner, this petition deserves to be allowed.
8. In case of his arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail subject to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer. However, it is directed that the petitioner shall join the investigation as and when so required by the Investigating Officer. He shall not contact any person associated with the case to dissuade him from the investigation in any manner whatsoever and nor shall leave the country without prior permission of the Court. He shall further comply with the conditions stipulated in Section 482(2) of BNSS.
9. Disposed of.
Petition allowed.
********