CRM-M/27172/2026 of VINOD KUMAR Vs STATE OF HARYANA on 13 August 2026

1. This petition has been filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 (Section 439 of Cr.P.C) for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No. 229 dated 19.12.2025 under Section 22-C, 29 of NDPS Act registered at P.S. Sector 20, Panchkula, Haryana.

2. The case of the prosecution is that 1200 tablets of Tramadol weighing approximately 364 grams i.e. commercial quantity without any valid license or permit were recovered from co-accused Baljinder Singh. During the course of investigation, his disclosure statement was recorded, wherein he stated that he had procured the said contraband from the petitioner. He further stated that he obtained the petitioner's mobile number through the internet, contacted him, and placed an order for the said contraband, which was thereafter sent by the petitioner through courier.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has has been nominated solely on the basis of the disclosure statement of RENU RAWAT

Chandigarh co-accused, which is not admissible in evidence against him. He further submits that nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. He further submits that there is no financial transaction between the petitioner and co-accused Baljinder Singh. It is further submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 26.12.2025 and prays for grant of regular bail.

4. Notice of motion.

5. Mr. Vishal Kashyap, Sr. DAG, Haryana. accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. He has vehemently opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner for the grant of regular bail on the ground that allegations against the petitioner are serious and grave. Learned State counsel has filed the custody certificate in the Court today and the same is taken on record. As per the custody certificate, the petitioner is in custody for the last 07 months and 14 days and is not involved in any other case.

6. I have heard the submissions made by the parties and gone through the record.

7. After hearing the rival contentions and considering the fact that in the case in hand, the petitioner is in custody for the last 07 months and 14 days and is not involved in any other case; apart from the disclosure statement, there is no other substantive evidence to connect the petitioner with the recovery effected from the co-accused coupled with the fact that the trial is likely to take considerable time, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served by further incarceration of the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is granted the concession of regular bail during the pendency of the trial. RENU RAWAT

Chandigarh

8. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.

9. Nothing discussed hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

10. It is clarified that if while on bail so granted through the instant order, the petitioner is found indulged in any other criminal case/activity, it shall be open to the State to seek cancellation of his bail. 13.08.2026 (H.S.GREWAL) renu

JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No RENU RAWAT

Chandigarh